Chapter 9 of the Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual discusses development in flood plains. Perry Homes and LJA Engineering somehow “overlooked” many of the points in this chapter. A flood plain ran through the property, but FEMA had not yet mapped it. LJA used that as an excuse to claim none existed.
Notice how flood plain mapping stops at county line. Perry Homes has the undeveloped property along and above the county line.Color code: Cross-hatched = floodway; aqua = hundred year flood plain; brown = 500-year flood plain.Source: MoCo Maps
Unfortunately, physical boundaries of flood plains do not observe political boundaries. Taylor Gully bisects this property, if you look at the flood maps, it magically defies flooding on the MoCo side of the county line.
Montgomery County Regulations Affecting Flood Plains
Below are guidelines from the Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual that Perry Homes would have had to follow had the property been mapped.
From Section 9.1.1 Floodplain Regulations:
“No fill or encroachment is permitted within the 100-year floodway which will impair its ability to discharge the 100-year peak flow rate except where the effect on flood heights has been fully offset by stream improvements.” [Emphasis added.]
“Placement of fill material within the floodplain requires a permit from the County Drainage Administrator. Appropriate fill compaction data and hydrologic and hydraulic data are required before a permit will be issued.”
From Section 9.1.2 Floodplain Development Guidelines and Procedures
“Construction within the floodway is limited to structures which will not obstruct the 100-year flood flow unless fully offsetting conveyance capacity is provided.”
“The existing designated 100-year floodplain and floodway should be plotted on a map of the proposed development.”
“The effect of the proposed development and the encroachment into the flood plain area should be incorporated into the hydraulic model and the resulting flood plain determined.”
“Careful consideration should be given to providing an accurate modeling of effective flow areas taking into account the expansion and contraction of the flow.”
“Once it has been determined that the proposed improvements adequately offset the encroachment, a revised floodway for the stream must be computed and delineated.”
From Section 9.2 Downstream Impact Analysis
“Pursuant to the official policy for Montgomery County, development will not be allowed in a manner which will increase the frequency or severity of flooding in areas that are currently subject to flooding or which will cause areas to flood which were not previously subject to flooding.”
What LJA Said About Perry Homes’ Project
On Page 1-2 of its Drainage Analysis, LJA Engineering explicitly states, “As shown on Exhibit 3, the proposed development is outside the 100-year floodplain.”
LJA Exhibit 3 shows the floodplain stopping at the county line. LJA also did its best to make the .2 percent risk area blend into the area of minimal flood risk. This visually minimizes the amount of floodplain bordering MoCo, so the abrupt stoppage at the county line becomes less visible.Source: LJA.
Ms. Mbewe then states in her conclusion, “Based on these findings, the proposed development of the 268-acre tract creates no adverse drainage impacts for events up to and including the 100-year event.” [Emphasis added.]
What Does “No Adverse Impact” Really Mean?
People often twist the definition of terms you think are self evident. Especially in legal, technical, and political contexts.
To me, “No Adverse Impact” should mean, “Downstream people who didn’t flood before won’t flood after development.” That’s what section 9.2 states explicitly.
But when I talked to a flood professional, I got a different answer. To that person, “no adverse impact” meant, “the amount of water flowing across the property did not increase after development.” Much narrower! And seemingly contradictory to the spirit of 9.2.
“Floodplain” Definition Shocked Me
But that person’s definition of floodplain really shocked me. To me, floodplain means “the area adjacent to a stream that fills with floodwater after a very heavy rain.” But the professional told me I was WRONG. To the professional, a floodplain was “an area on a map that FEMA designated a floodplain for insurance purposes.”
In that person’s mind, because FEMA had never mapped the area in question, a floodplain did NOT EXIST. Whether or not the area flooded!
To me, that’s like saying an apple is something you see in a Kroger’s flyer, not something you eat. We’re talking about the difference between a symbol of something and the reality of it.
This discussion proved once again that words and phrases have different meanings that depend on the social context of usage.
In the minimum compliance environment of Montgomery County, LJA and Perry Homes argued that there was no floodplain. They found someone in the county engineer’s office who agreed with them…or was told to agree with them.
FYI, the official FEMA definition says, “Any land area susceptible to being inundated by floodwaters from any source.”
Consequences of Overly Narrow Definition
So did Elm Grove flood because Perry Homes, LJA and Montgomery County did not enforce the floodplain regs in section 9.2 of the Drainage Criteria Manual?
They did not plot the REAL-WORLD floodway and floodplain on a map of the proposed development (see above).
LJA did not incorporate encroachment into the floodplain in its hydraulic modeling, because they denied a floodplain existed.
Neither did LJA provide “an accurate modeling of effective flow areas taking into account the expansion and contraction of the flow.”
Finally, LJA did not compute, revise and delineate the floodway for the stream.
Had they done all these things, perhaps people would have seen that downstream homes that had never flooded were now subject to greater flood risk. But that’s really something for the jury to decide. And it would require FEMA to model the floodplain after the fact.
But like the narrow definition of floodplain, this whole discussion symbolizes a bigger problem.
How Do You Fix a Permissive, Minimum-Compliance Environment?
Perry Homes could have demanded honest answers from its engineers, not the ones they wanted to hear.
FEMA could label areas like Woodridge Village “UNMAPPED”. This would send a signal to potential home buyers if sellers tell them they’re NOT in a floodplain. That might make developers think twice.
Home buyers need to demand integrity in this process. They need to ask better questions. They need to learn more about flooding.
But at the end of the day, Montgomery County Commissioners must define the kind of future they want. Do they want constant flooding? Or not. Because right now, they’re competing with other areas for new development on the basis of willful blindness and self-serving definitions.
Thirty years down the road, when it’s too late to fix the infrastructure problems they ignore today, MOCO residents will be paying the price. Some, who have flooded repeatedly, might argue they already are.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/26/2019 with help from Jeff Miller
820 Days after Harvey and 69 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/2019/11/HarrisMocoCountyLineFloodPlain.jpg?fit=1500%2C883&ssl=18831500adminadmin2019-11-26 20:52:182019-11-26 21:42:44What Went Wrong, Part IV: Perry Homes Develops Flood Plain That Wasn’t
This morning, I was talking to a friend, John Knoezer, about flooding in Elm Grove when he suddenly blurted out, “You know, the National Flood Insurance people should sue Perry Homes and turn that Woodridge Village into a giant detention pond.”
I knew John had a genius for heating and air conditioning. But I had no idea he also had a genius for politics, too. Boom. There it was. One simple idea to fix multiple problems. The NFIP budget deficit. Flood mitigation. Mushrooming tax bills. And rogue developers who ignore flood regulations at others’ peril. And all it requires is getting NFIP to act like any other insurance company.
Get NFIP to Behave Like a Normal Insurance Company
If the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) sued the people responsible for flooding Elm Grove, North Kingwood Forest and Porter, it could likely recover enough payouts to fix the lack of detention in Woodridge Village, Perry Homes’ troubled development in Montgomery County.
All we’re really talking about is getting NFIP to behave like a normal commercial insurance company. For instance, if someone rear-ends your car, your insurance company sues the person who did it (or their insurance company) to recover the amount of your claim. But not NFIP, according to everyone I’ve talked to.
Elm Grove after the May 7th storm, where block after block, homes were being gutted. Several feet of water from Perry Homes Woodridge Village development inundated homes that had never flooded before.
That money could easily buy the Woodridge Village land and construct a massive detention pond that would prevent future flooding.
Such lawsuits, if won, could also help reduce future taxpayer-subsidized flood-mitigation expenditures, most of which the federal government helps underwrite in some manner. But that’s just for starters.
Get Developers to Stop Pushing the Flood-Risk Envelope
Going after flagrant developers might help in another way, too. It might change the economics of pushing the flood-risk envelope. Right now, the economics favor those who push it hardest and furthest.
Land costs are the largest component of development costs. They’re also the fastest rising component. So buying cheap, flood-prone land rewards developers.
According to residents, not one home flooded in this neighborhood west of Woodridge Village flooded before May 7, 2019. However, on May 7th, the vast majority of homes did flood…after Woodridge Village contractors altered the drainage going out of the subdivision. Flood data from Montgomery County. Flood Story Map hosted by ESRI.
If NFIP successfully sued the developer, the precedent might encourage all developers everywhere to follow the rules instead of bending them.
Save Tax Dollars
The precedent of NFIP suing a developer might also deter other developers in the future from pushing flood-prone projects or developing them in ways that contribute to flooding. So it could further reduce NFIP payouts and overhead. That could save even more dollars for this taxpayer subsidized program.
Bypass County Commissioners Who Refuse to Enforce Their Own Regulations
Another benefit of John’s brilliant suggestion: it eliminates a political battle with Montgomery County Judges and Commissioners – which may be unwindable for people in another county. Just get NFIP to make an example of a high-profile developer, such as Perry Homes. That might change some developers’ behavior who operate under the protective cover of local politicians. Those politicians compete for development dollars by not enforcing their own regulations. And that’s a huge part of the problem. Especially when a county line divides the perpetrators and victims as it does in this case.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/26/2019, with inspiration from John Knoezer
819 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 68 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/2019/11/Elm-Grove-Flood_67.jpg?fit=1500%2C1000&ssl=110001500adminadmin2019-11-25 19:29:122019-11-25 19:58:58A Simple Proposal to Fix NFIP, Reduce Elm Grove’s Flood Risk, Save Taxpayer Dollars, and Force Perry Homes to Follow Rules
Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) reports that it is buying out a handful of low-lying homes on Fieldtree Drive in Northshire where the City of Humble could soon build a pocket park. The area flooded badly during Harvey. Northshire lies between Deerbrook Mall and the San Jacinto River west of the hotels that line US59.
A drive down Fieldtree reveals several homes at the bottom of the hill that have already been demolished and others that look abandoned.
Area under discussion on 8.30.17 after peak of Hurricane Harvey.
HCFCD Buyouts in Progress
Several lots that head down the hill on Fieldtree have been cleared.Several others appear as though owners have abandoned themand would make good candidates for buyouts.
Impact of Flooded and Abandoned Homes on Tax Base
For the most part, modest but well-maintained homes line Fieldtree. The street slopes sharply and all of the vacant or abandoned lots lie at or near the bottom of a hill near Glencreek Drive.
Harris County Appraisal District shows that home market values took a beating in this neighborhood after Harvey. Appraisals for homes at the top of the hill went down about 15%. The farther down the hill you went, the farther down appraisals went – from 20% to 30% or more. The house above even lost a whopping 65% of its market value.
Currently, the abandoned homes seem to be dragging down values of homes that didn’t flood on higher ground. However…
Pocket Park Could Help Reverse Downward Trend
According to Humble City Manager Jason Stuebe, Humble is considering building a pocket park once buyouts in this area are complete.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Northshire.jpg?fit=1500%2C1104&ssl=111041500adminadmin2019-11-24 21:26:422019-11-24 21:26:51HCFCD Buying Out Low-Lying Homes In Northshire Near Deerbrook Mall; Humble Considering Pocket Park
What Went Wrong, Part IV: Perry Homes Develops Flood Plain That Wasn’t
Chapter 9 of the Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual discusses development in flood plains. Perry Homes and LJA Engineering somehow “overlooked” many of the points in this chapter. A flood plain ran through the property, but FEMA had not yet mapped it. LJA used that as an excuse to claim none existed.
Unfortunately, physical boundaries of flood plains do not observe political boundaries. Taylor Gully bisects this property, if you look at the flood maps, it magically defies flooding on the MoCo side of the county line.
Montgomery County Regulations Affecting Flood Plains
Below are guidelines from the Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual that Perry Homes would have had to follow had the property been mapped.
From Section 9.1.1 Floodplain Regulations:
“No fill or encroachment is permitted within the 100-year floodway which will impair its ability to discharge the 100-year peak flow rate except where the effect on flood heights has been fully offset by stream improvements.” [Emphasis added.]
“Placement of fill material within the floodplain requires a permit from the County Drainage Administrator. Appropriate fill compaction data and hydrologic and hydraulic data are required before a permit will be issued.”
From Section 9.1.2 Floodplain Development Guidelines and Procedures
“Construction within the floodway is limited to structures which will not obstruct the 100-year flood flow unless fully offsetting conveyance capacity is provided.”
From Section 9.2 Downstream Impact Analysis
“Pursuant to the official policy for Montgomery County, development will not be allowed in a manner which will increase the frequency or severity of flooding in areas that are currently subject to flooding or which will cause areas to flood which were not previously subject to flooding.”
What LJA Said About Perry Homes’ Project
Ms. Mbewe then states in her conclusion, “Based on these findings, the proposed development of the 268-acre tract creates no adverse drainage impacts for events up to and including the 100-year event.” [Emphasis added.]
What Does “No Adverse Impact” Really Mean?
People often twist the definition of terms you think are self evident. Especially in legal, technical, and political contexts.
To me, “No Adverse Impact” should mean, “Downstream people who didn’t flood before won’t flood after development.” That’s what section 9.2 states explicitly.
But when I talked to a flood professional, I got a different answer. To that person, “no adverse impact” meant, “the amount of water flowing across the property did not increase after development.” Much narrower! And seemingly contradictory to the spirit of 9.2.
“Floodplain” Definition Shocked Me
But that person’s definition of floodplain really shocked me. To me, floodplain means “the area adjacent to a stream that fills with floodwater after a very heavy rain.” But the professional told me I was WRONG. To the professional, a floodplain was “an area on a map that FEMA designated a floodplain for insurance purposes.”
In that person’s mind, because FEMA had never mapped the area in question, a floodplain did NOT EXIST. Whether or not the area flooded!
To me, that’s like saying an apple is something you see in a Kroger’s flyer, not something you eat. We’re talking about the difference between a symbol of something and the reality of it.
In the minimum compliance environment of Montgomery County, LJA and Perry Homes argued that there was no floodplain. They found someone in the county engineer’s office who agreed with them…or was told to agree with them.
Consequences of Overly Narrow Definition
So did Elm Grove flood because Perry Homes, LJA and Montgomery County did not enforce the floodplain regs in section 9.2 of the Drainage Criteria Manual?
Had they done all these things, perhaps people would have seen that downstream homes that had never flooded were now subject to greater flood risk. But that’s really something for the jury to decide. And it would require FEMA to model the floodplain after the fact.
But like the narrow definition of floodplain, this whole discussion symbolizes a bigger problem.
How Do You Fix a Permissive, Minimum-Compliance Environment?
LJA had an obligation to its client and a higher one to the public that it ignored in my opinion.
Perry Homes could have demanded honest answers from its engineers, not the ones they wanted to hear.
FEMA could label areas like Woodridge Village “UNMAPPED”. This would send a signal to potential home buyers if sellers tell them they’re NOT in a floodplain. That might make developers think twice.
Home buyers need to demand integrity in this process. They need to ask better questions. They need to learn more about flooding.
But at the end of the day, Montgomery County Commissioners must define the kind of future they want. Do they want constant flooding? Or not. Because right now, they’re competing with other areas for new development on the basis of willful blindness and self-serving definitions.
Thirty years down the road, when it’s too late to fix the infrastructure problems they ignore today, MOCO residents will be paying the price. Some, who have flooded repeatedly, might argue they already are.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/26/2019 with help from Jeff Miller
820 Days after Harvey and 69 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.
A Simple Proposal to Fix NFIP, Reduce Elm Grove’s Flood Risk, Save Taxpayer Dollars, and Force Perry Homes to Follow Rules
This morning, I was talking to a friend, John Knoezer, about flooding in Elm Grove when he suddenly blurted out, “You know, the National Flood Insurance people should sue Perry Homes and turn that Woodridge Village into a giant detention pond.”
Get NFIP to Behave Like a Normal Insurance Company
If the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) sued the people responsible for flooding Elm Grove, North Kingwood Forest and Porter, it could likely recover enough payouts to fix the lack of detention in Woodridge Village, Perry Homes’ troubled development in Montgomery County.
All we’re really talking about is getting NFIP to behave like a normal commercial insurance company. For instance, if someone rear-ends your car, your insurance company sues the person who did it (or their insurance company) to recover the amount of your claim. But not NFIP, according to everyone I’ve talked to.
NFIP currently carries a $20 billion debt to taxpayers. Going after egregious companies that contribute to repeat flooding could reduce that amount.
It might also get those rogue companies to behave more cautiously and responsibly in the future. That could reduce future claims and NFIP’s overhead.
Imagine all the taxpayer dollars that could have been saved if Elm Grove, North Kingwood Forest and Porter had never flooded.
NFIP has already paid out twice this year to hundreds of flooded homeowners. And those homeowners could easily flood again and again. Because Perry Homes is doing NOTHING to reduce future flooding! Nothing incentivizes Perry Homes to reduce flooding.
NFIP has created no deterrent to flooding neighbors. So why would developers care if they do?
Another Benefit: Recovering Money in Court to Fix the Problem
If the repair costs downstream from Perry Home’s Woodridge Village total $100 million and just half the people had NFIP insurance, that’s $50 million that NFIP might recover from Perry Homes in court.
Such lawsuits, if won, could also help reduce future taxpayer-subsidized flood-mitigation expenditures, most of which the federal government helps underwrite in some manner. But that’s just for starters.
Get Developers to Stop Pushing the Flood-Risk Envelope
Going after flagrant developers might help in another way, too. It might change the economics of pushing the flood-risk envelope. Right now, the economics favor those who push it hardest and furthest.
Developers have no disincentive to keep pushing these envelopes. NFIP bears all the flood risk; developers make all the profit.
We’re giving a competitive advantage to developers who worsen flooding. If NFIP were to sue a developer occasionally, it might change that.
Create Incentives to Follow Rules
In this case, had Perry Homes followed the rules and developed Woodridge the way it said it was going to, hundreds of homeowners would likely not have flooded.
Before Perry started developing the property, Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest flood victims had weathered many storms as bad as May 7 and Imelda without flooding. So had people in Montgomery County on the western edge of the development where block after block of homes flooded that had never flooded before. See map of that area below and note the number of homes that flooded during the Harvey, Memorial Day, Tax Day and 1994 floods – ZERO!
So far, we’ve found numerous instances where Perry Homes did NOT follow Montgomery County or State of Texas regulations. People downstream paid the price.
For details, see installments to date in these “What Went Wrong” posts:
If NFIP successfully sued the developer, the precedent might encourage all developers everywhere to follow the rules instead of bending them.
Save Tax Dollars
The precedent of NFIP suing a developer might also deter other developers in the future from pushing flood-prone projects or developing them in ways that contribute to flooding. So it could further reduce NFIP payouts and overhead. That could save even more dollars for this taxpayer subsidized program.
Bypass County Commissioners Who Refuse to Enforce Their Own Regulations
Another benefit of John’s brilliant suggestion: it eliminates a political battle with Montgomery County Judges and Commissioners – which may be unwindable for people in another county. Just get NFIP to make an example of a high-profile developer, such as Perry Homes. That might change some developers’ behavior who operate under the protective cover of local politicians. Those politicians compete for development dollars by not enforcing their own regulations. And that’s a huge part of the problem. Especially when a county line divides the perpetrators and victims as it does in this case.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/26/2019, with inspiration from John Knoezer
819 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 68 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.
HCFCD Buying Out Low-Lying Homes In Northshire Near Deerbrook Mall; Humble Considering Pocket Park
Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) reports that it is buying out a handful of low-lying homes on Fieldtree Drive in Northshire where the City of Humble could soon build a pocket park. The area flooded badly during Harvey. Northshire lies between Deerbrook Mall and the San Jacinto River west of the hotels that line US59.
A drive down Fieldtree reveals several homes at the bottom of the hill that have already been demolished and others that look abandoned.
HCFCD Buyouts in Progress
Impact of Flooded and Abandoned Homes on Tax Base
For the most part, modest but well-maintained homes line Fieldtree. The street slopes sharply and all of the vacant or abandoned lots lie at or near the bottom of a hill near Glencreek Drive.
Harris County Appraisal District shows that home market values took a beating in this neighborhood after Harvey. Appraisals for homes at the top of the hill went down about 15%. The farther down the hill you went, the farther down appraisals went – from 20% to 30% or more. The house above even lost a whopping 65% of its market value.
Currently, the abandoned homes seem to be dragging down values of homes that didn’t flood on higher ground. However…
Pocket Park Could Help Reverse Downward Trend
According to Humble City Manager Jason Stuebe, Humble is considering building a pocket park once buyouts in this area are complete.
A pocket park could make a nice residential amenity that helps home values in the neighborhood bounce back. Proximity to parks can help improve home values more than 20% according to a Texas A&M survey of more than 30 different studies. The increase in home values can even pay for the park according to the A&M study. The park could even be an amenity that helps attract guests to hotels across the street.
This could be a win-win for everyone involved.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/25/2019
818 Days since Hurricane Harvey