Jim Zura has posted three videos he shot at Romerica’s public meeting in the Kingwood Community Center on March 18, 2019. The first covers questions I asked Gabriel Haddad, one of Romerica’s two principles, before the meeting officially started. The next two cover questions and answers asked by community members after the formal presentations by Romerica and its suppliers.
Additional Videos to Follow
Zura says additional video will follow. He does national quality work from his base right here in Kingwood. Zura volunteered his services to the community on this project out of concern for the impact the development could have on the community. Please note: Zura fought a high level of ambient crowd noise to obtain these videos. While they won’t win an Emmy for sound quality, they very adequately capture the responses and promises made to the community regarding this controversial development.
The first video is me going one-on-one with Romerica developer Gabriel Haddad.
Rehak (left) interviewing Haddad (right) at the Kingwood Community Center Public Meeting. That’s Dianne Lansden of the Lake Houston Area Grass Roots Flood Prevention Initiative in the background.
After presentations by Romerica and its associates, the audience got a chance to ask questions from the floor. Below is the first thirty minutes of the Q&A session.
I ask Mr. Haddad how his development will generate $135 million in tax revenues and point out that that’s more than the rest of Kingwood combined contributes to the City of Houston or Harris County. He responds that that’s only if it’s all built out. I ask, “How likely is that?” He responds: “Not very.” Mr. Haddad then goes on to describe why and blames sedimentation in the river.
Other topics we discussed included:
How he plans to get around the deed restrictions by Friendswood
Long-range plans if he can’t get a permit
Evacuation in the event of a flood
Noise
School district overcrowding
His maze of companies
Changing architectural firms in mid-stream, no pun intended
Mr. Haddad answers one or two questions somewhat directly, pivots on others, and claims they’re still working out details on the rest.
Audience Q&A: Part 1
Audience Q&A went for a total of 50 minutes. Unfortunately, some people turned questions into rants. Other people shouted questions from the floor that were not picked up by the microphone. So I’m not going to attempt to transcribe the entire session, but will provide time codes for the questions I could understand. That way you can fast forward to specific segments that may interest you. All time codes are approximate:
0:00 Concern about impact on land adjacent to the Romerica development
2:00 Concern about flooding and how it will be mitigated
3:15 Statement by lady who says she wants “Livable Forest,” not high-rises.
3:45 Are you not worried about building high-rises at ground zero for the worst natural disaster in U.S. history?
6:45 How are you getting around single-family residential deed restrictions?
8:45 Who do you expect to invest and what kind of businesses do you expect to attract? Concerned about inaccessibility of location. Says they will find other locations more attractive. (No response from developer.)
10:20. Gentleman asks for vote from floor about who approves/disapproves of development.
13:50 Lady observes that every home that flooded had surveys done assuring the owners that it would not. What makes your development different?
15:00 Have you engaged hydrologists and do you have money set aside to restore the property if the development fails.
17:30 Lady doesn’t like comparison to Woodlands. Says she moved here because it wasn’t so commercial.
18:20 Concern about lack of plans for traffic and noise mitigation.
22:20 Are you willing to pay for dredging?
24:15 How are you going to evacuate people from a dead-end road? Are you going to elevate Woodland Hills Drive?
Audience Q&A: Part 2
The same caveats apply here:
0:00 Concerns about loss of view and quiet?
2:50 Will you listen to and respect the will of the community?
3:30 Will ALL construction be postponed until solution is found for flooding? How will new flood maps and watershed study affect your plans? What’s the time frame for your development? (Hint: Answer: We will not do anything until there is a flooding solution.)
9:10 What is the source of your funding?
12:15 Do you have backup and failsafe plans?
13:15 How will you address flood levels that get worse with time?
Next Steps
As in my interview questions, sometimes the answers were direct and sometimes they weren’t. Sometimes, they just let people rant and didn’t answer at all. By the time Romerica wrapped everything up, most of the audience had left and they were turning out the lights.
Since the meeting, they have had more than a month to address the concerns that more than 700 people and groups submitted in protest letters to the Army Corps.
Now the Corps needs to sift through all their responses and make sure they addressed valid concerns. You can expect plans to change. Romerica has already posted online that they are planning to elevate the entire development another six to ten feet. That will likely involve more fill and stimulate more concerns about flooding.
Thoughts expressed in this post represent my opinions on matters of public interest. They are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.
Posted by Bob Rehak on April 28, 2019
607 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/PublicMeetingPart1.jpg?fit=1500%2C836&ssl=18361500adminadmin2019-04-28 21:27:122019-04-28 21:36:11Zura Productions Posts Interview with High-Rise Developer and Q&A From Public Meeting
A reminder. Today, Romerica Investments, LLC. owes the Army Corps of Engineers answers to all of the questions, comments and concerns raised during the public comment period for its proposed high-rise development and marina resort.
More than 700 Protest Letters Filed
The Corps is ruling on a permit application for a 3.2 million square foot development near the floodway of the San Jacinto West Fork. The proposed development would surround the Barrington, and be adjacent to Kingwood Lakes, Trailwood, King’s Cove Deer Ridge Estates, Deer Ridge Park and River Grove Park.
It will be interesting to see how Romerica responds to all these concerns. They can change their plans for the future. But they can’t change their past.
At a public meeting held AFTER the public comment period, Gabriel M. Haddad, co-owner, of a maze of related companies, partnerships, LLPs and LLCs in different countries and states, said it could take up to two years for the Corps to rule on his permit application.
The Corporate Maze Related to Romerica
I have a call in to the Corps to discuss next steps and how long they will take. Stay tuned.
Note: Ideas expressed in the post represent my opinions on matters of public interest. They are protected by the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/27/2019
606 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Woodland-hills-map.png?fit=1061%2C1024&ssl=110241061adminadmin2019-04-27 20:56:202019-04-27 21:14:43Answer Day for High-Rise Developer
Yesterday, I posted about how greater setbacks from rivers could improve safety for sand mines and downstream residents. Setbacks reduce the potential for erosion, sedimentation and consequent flooding. Here’s a related post that shows what happens when you try to build too close to rivers.
Note repairs to dike. I took this photo two weeks after Harvey.
First, understand that the closer you mine to the river, the steeper the slope of dikes must be. At a certain point, the slope becomes so steep that:
Grasses and trees can’t take root in it.
The loose soil becomes prone to erosion.
During floods, water in the river rises faster than in the pit.
Depending on the depth of the pit, the volume of sediment in it, and the force of the flood, sediment could be carried downstream.
Another factor leading to dike collapse in the photo above is the road built on top of it. Running heavy equipment over the sandy soil causes it to compact and push outward. Vehicle traffic also keeps vegetation that could bind the soil from growing.
Accidents Waiting to Happen
It doesn’t take a Harvey-scale flood to breach these loose dikes. The unmemorable July 4th flood of last year breached the dike shown above.
Repairs to one of three dike breaches at a sand mine in Dec. 7 flood last year. Photo by Don Harbour Jr.
Here’s another breach at the same mine that hadn’t yet healed when I photographed it on September 28th last year.
Site of a breach in the dike of a sand mine. Note how the loss of vegetation has led to erosion and sloughing in the sandy soil.
When such breaches happen on both sides of a point bar, the river will “capture” the pit by rerouting through it – the shortest distance between two points.
West Fork sand mines on 8/30/17, one day after the peak from from Harvey
West Fork vs. East Fork and Value of Riparian Vegetation
Almost all of these problems could be solved by greater setbacks from rivers. That would retain more natural riparian vegetation and allow lower, more gradual slopes on dikes. It would also allow additional re-vegetation to take hold.
Shooting across the West Fork from on top of the dike shown in the first photo above. Note how loose the soil was in the foreground and how difficult it is to establish vegetation on the opposite shore in the middleground. Floods have torn away the erosion blankets trying to establish grass on the steep slopes.
Imagine 131,000 cubic feet per second ripping through a channel like this. That’s how much came down this portion of the West Fork at the peak of Harvey. It’s easy to see how the river could erode these dikes and invade the mines.
That’s why we need greater setbacks. It will allow more conveyance through the normal channel. And if we just leave native negation in place, it should help hold the dikes in place.
Now contrast the images above with this one taken on a portion of the East Fork where there are no sand mines.
Lush riparian vegetation and trees held the banks in place during Harvey.
Here’s another.
Offsetting Opportunity Costs with Conservation Easements
Mother Nature’s solution to sedimentation is free. If we could only just learn to respect the river and its flood plains. Yes, there would still be some sedimentation to deal with, but not nearly as much.
The loss of sand close to the river is an opportunity cost, not an out-of-pocket cost. Groups like the Bayou Land Conservancy can help offset some of that opportunity cost by providing income in exchange for conservation easements. I wish miners would explore this option more…for everyone’s benefit including theirs. It certainly might reduce their legal costs.
Posted by Bob Rehak on April 27, 2019
606 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/BankErosion_01.jpg?fit=1500%2C864&ssl=18641500adminadmin2019-04-26 21:28:102019-04-26 21:28:51Earth Week Part 4: Slope of Sand Mine Dikes, Riparian Vegetation and Cost Offsets
Zura Productions Posts Interview with High-Rise Developer and Q&A From Public Meeting
Jim Zura has posted three videos he shot at Romerica’s public meeting in the Kingwood Community Center on March 18, 2019. The first covers questions I asked Gabriel Haddad, one of Romerica’s two principles, before the meeting officially started. The next two cover questions and answers asked by community members after the formal presentations by Romerica and its suppliers.
Additional Videos to Follow
Zura says additional video will follow. He does national quality work from his base right here in Kingwood. Zura volunteered his services to the community on this project out of concern for the impact the development could have on the community. Please note: Zura fought a high level of ambient crowd noise to obtain these videos. While they won’t win an Emmy for sound quality, they very adequately capture the responses and promises made to the community regarding this controversial development.
The first video is me going one-on-one with Romerica developer Gabriel Haddad.
Click here to see the Rehak-Haddad discussion on vimeo.com. It should open up in a new tab.
After presentations by Romerica and its associates, the audience got a chance to ask questions from the floor. Below is the first thirty minutes of the Q&A session.
See the Herons Meeting Kingwood Q&A Part 1 of 2 on vimeo.com.
The last part of the Q&A session runs for another 20 minutes.
See the Herons Meeting Kingwood Q&A Part 2 of 2 on vimeo.com.
Summary: Rehak Interview with Haddad
I ask Mr. Haddad how his development will generate $135 million in tax revenues and point out that that’s more than the rest of Kingwood combined contributes to the City of Houston or Harris County. He responds that that’s only if it’s all built out. I ask, “How likely is that?” He responds: “Not very.” Mr. Haddad then goes on to describe why and blames sedimentation in the river.
Other topics we discussed included:
Mr. Haddad answers one or two questions somewhat directly, pivots on others, and claims they’re still working out details on the rest.
Audience Q&A: Part 1
Audience Q&A went for a total of 50 minutes. Unfortunately, some people turned questions into rants. Other people shouted questions from the floor that were not picked up by the microphone. So I’m not going to attempt to transcribe the entire session, but will provide time codes for the questions I could understand. That way you can fast forward to specific segments that may interest you. All time codes are approximate:
Audience Q&A: Part 2
The same caveats apply here:
Next Steps
As in my interview questions, sometimes the answers were direct and sometimes they weren’t. Sometimes, they just let people rant and didn’t answer at all. By the time Romerica wrapped everything up, most of the audience had left and they were turning out the lights.
Since the meeting, they have had more than a month to address the concerns that more than 700 people and groups submitted in protest letters to the Army Corps.
Now the Corps needs to sift through all their responses and make sure they addressed valid concerns. You can expect plans to change. Romerica has already posted online that they are planning to elevate the entire development another six to ten feet. That will likely involve more fill and stimulate more concerns about flooding.
Thoughts expressed in this post represent my opinions on matters of public interest. They are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.
Posted by Bob Rehak on April 28, 2019
607 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Answer Day for High-Rise Developer
A reminder. Today, Romerica Investments, LLC. owes the Army Corps of Engineers answers to all of the questions, comments and concerns raised during the public comment period for its proposed high-rise development and marina resort.
More than 700 Protest Letters Filed
The Corps is ruling on a permit application for a 3.2 million square foot development near the floodway of the San Jacinto West Fork. The proposed development would surround the Barrington, and be adjacent to Kingwood Lakes, Trailwood, King’s Cove Deer Ridge Estates, Deer Ridge Park and River Grove Park.
According to the Corps, Kingwood residents raised a record number of concerns. More than 700 people and groups submitted letters of protest. Let’s look at just a few of the concerns; read some of the letters that include impacts on:
Additional Concerns
People and groups also raised concerns about:
And That Was Just for Starters
It will be interesting to see how Romerica responds to all these concerns. They can change their plans for the future. But they can’t change their past.
At a public meeting held AFTER the public comment period, Gabriel M. Haddad, co-owner, of a maze of related companies, partnerships, LLPs and LLCs in different countries and states, said it could take up to two years for the Corps to rule on his permit application.
I have a call in to the Corps to discuss next steps and how long they will take. Stay tuned.
Note: Ideas expressed in the post represent my opinions on matters of public interest. They are protected by the first amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/27/2019
606 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Earth Week Part 4: Slope of Sand Mine Dikes, Riparian Vegetation and Cost Offsets
Yesterday, I posted about how greater setbacks from rivers could improve safety for sand mines and downstream residents. Setbacks reduce the potential for erosion, sedimentation and consequent flooding. Here’s a related post that shows what happens when you try to build too close to rivers.
First, understand that the closer you mine to the river, the steeper the slope of dikes must be. At a certain point, the slope becomes so steep that:
Another factor leading to dike collapse in the photo above is the road built on top of it. Running heavy equipment over the sandy soil causes it to compact and push outward. Vehicle traffic also keeps vegetation that could bind the soil from growing.
Accidents Waiting to Happen
It doesn’t take a Harvey-scale flood to breach these loose dikes. The unmemorable July 4th flood of last year breached the dike shown above.
Another flood on December 7th last year breached a dike in another sand mine downstream from the first one in three places!
Here’s another breach at the same mine that hadn’t yet healed when I photographed it on September 28th last year.
When such breaches happen on both sides of a point bar, the river will “capture” the pit by rerouting through it – the shortest distance between two points.
West Fork vs. East Fork and Value of Riparian Vegetation
Almost all of these problems could be solved by greater setbacks from rivers. That would retain more natural riparian vegetation and allow lower, more gradual slopes on dikes. It would also allow additional re-vegetation to take hold.
Imagine 131,000 cubic feet per second ripping through a channel like this. That’s how much came down this portion of the West Fork at the peak of Harvey. It’s easy to see how the river could erode these dikes and invade the mines.
That’s why we need greater setbacks. It will allow more conveyance through the normal channel. And if we just leave native negation in place, it should help hold the dikes in place.
Now contrast the images above with this one taken on a portion of the East Fork where there are no sand mines.
Here’s another.
Offsetting Opportunity Costs with Conservation Easements
Mother Nature’s solution to sedimentation is free. If we could only just learn to respect the river and its flood plains. Yes, there would still be some sedimentation to deal with, but not nearly as much.
The loss of sand close to the river is an opportunity cost, not an out-of-pocket cost. Groups like the Bayou Land Conservancy can help offset some of that opportunity cost by providing income in exchange for conservation easements. I wish miners would explore this option more…for everyone’s benefit including theirs. It certainly might reduce their legal costs.
Posted by Bob Rehak on April 27, 2019
606 Days after Hurricane Harvey