According to an Associated Press (AP) story published this weekend, “A recent study for the National Institute of Building Sciences found that society as a whole saves $7 in avoided costs for every $1 spent through federally funded grants to acquire or demolish flood-prone buildings.”
Idea Behind Buyouts
Buyouts are a strategy used by FEMA to avoid multiple payouts from the National Flood Insurance Program for properties that flood over and over again. At some point, it becomes cheaper to buy the home and tear it down than to fix it repeatedly. However, buyouts can take years to process and they are always voluntary. Moreover, even if a homeowner decides not to sell, the government continues to underwrite his/her insurance.
The AP story by David A. Lieb cited the case of Mosby, Mo. Residents there flooded three times in six weeks in 2015. Many quickly signed up for buyouts, but are still waiting for offers years later.
With 7/1 savings, one wonders why it takes government so long to acquire these homes? Buyout experts that I talked to say that one of the keys to successfully negotiating a buyout is making people offers BEFORE they rebuild their homes. That observation argues for the need to streamline the buyout process, not drag it out for years.
Attempt to Streamline Buyouts
The AP story quotes U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. His committee has jurisdiction over FEMA. He questions why “….[we] keep selling them (flooded homeowners) insurance and building in the same place?”
The article continues: “DeFazio wants to expand and revamp a buyout process that he describes as inefficient and irrational. He’s backing a proposed pilot project that would give homeowners a break on their flood insurance premiums, as long as they agree in advance to a buyout that would turn their property into green space if their homes are substantially damaged by a flood.”
What 240,000 cubic feet of water per second does to a dream home with a river view.Next building is scheduled for demolition on June 3.
Status of Forest Cove Townhome Buyouts on Marina Drive
The buyout process from Harvey is just getting started in some parts of Texas. Harris County Flood Control has already bought out many homes in the Forest Cove area. “We’ve purchased three entire buildings. One has been demolished and two more are in process,” said James Wade of the Flood Control District. “We have about 65% of the units along Marina Drive purchased and are working through the remaining units.”
But over in Liberty County, officials have just started the buyout process. Buyouts require cooperation between the federal government which funds them, and city or county officials which negotiate them. Therefore, the success of buyout programs often depends on the interest level of cities and counties.
Buyout Success Often Depends on City or County
Counties that aggressively pursue buyout dollars from the federal government can offer residents an option that other counties can’t or don’t.
While most of the Marina Drive townhomes in Forest Cove are structurally unsound and therefore uninhabitable, residents elsewhere, such as Tammy Gunnels in unincorporated Montgomery County, have clamored for buyouts with no luck for years. With the May 7th rains, her home has flooded now 11 times in 10 years.
I applaud Representative DeFazio’s attempt to reform the buyout system. It seems like one of those rare instances when the humane thing to do is also the most cost-effective thing to do.
Turning Problems into Natural Retention and Recreation
A more efficient buyout process will also help rejuvenate and beautify neighborhoods. In the case of Forest Cove, the City of Houston Parks Board and Harris County Precinct Four are already working together to build a greenbelt trail. The trail would connect the County’s new Edgewater Park, under development at Hamblen and US59 with Kingwood’s trail system. That could also open up the entire Spring Creek greenbelt system to Kingwood and Forest Cove hikers and bikers. I can’t wait!
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/28/19
638 days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/San-Jac-5.17.19_92.jpg?fit=1500%2C1000&ssl=110001500adminadmin2019-05-28 20:33:292019-05-29 14:42:07AP Story Highlights Efforts to Streamline Buyout Process
Six hundred and thirty-seven days after Hurricane Harvey, the Texas Legislature finally passed and funded a massive flood-relief bill, Senate Bill #7 (SB 7), sponsored by State Senator Brandon Creighton. The lengthy delay between Harvey and the bill’s passage underscores the need for Creighton’s bill.
Need for Faster Mitigation
Few government entities, it seems, budget for emergencies. So when a tragedy like Harvey happens, cities and counties scurry around looking for small grants. They use those to hire consultants to apply for other small grants that provide matching funds for even bigger grants from FEMA.
There’s even a two-step process to get on the list for grant consideration at the Federal level. You don’t just apply to FEMA or HUD. First, you have to file an application with the TDEM (Texas Division of Emergency Management, a part of DPS) before you can file an application with FEMA.
Most of the begging goes on behind the scenes, out of sight to the average citizen. The fact that the City or County has applied for a grant falls below the threshold of newsworthiness in most cases and so remains invisible to all but insiders. Once someone approves the grants, lengthy permitting processes further delay construction. It take years for a mitigation project to get to the construction phase. That’s when a project becomes newsworthy again.
Changing a Frustrating Process
This is why, to the average citizen, the pace of flood mitigation appears maddeningly and frighteningly slow. Important projects, such as additional dredging, gates for Lake Houston, and upstream detention, seem perpetually mired in government red tape.
The passage of Senate Bill (SB) 7 and SB 500 could help change that. The Senate and House have passed both bills, which are on their way to Governor Abbott’s desk. State Representative Dan Huberty says the governor supports both bills and that his signature is certain.
Here’s what they do:
SB 7 sets up several different funds that will make it easier to launch flood mitigation projects.
SB 500 appropriates the money for the funds in SB 7.
Provisions in SB 7
SB 7 relates to flood planning, mitigation and infrastructure projects.
Article 1 in SB 7 provides money for: flood control planning; preparation of applications for regulatory approvals; and development of engineering plans/specifications for flood mitigation and drainage projects.
Article 2 establishes a special flood infrastructure fund to make loans (at or below market interest rates) for flood projects. It can also provide grants that provide matching funds to poorer political subdivisions that make them eligible to participate in federal programs.
Article 3 amends the state Water Code relating to the Texas Infrastructure Resiliency Fund by establishing special accounts for Floodplain Management, Hurricane Harvey, Federal Matching projects, and Flood Plan Implementation.
Provisions in SB 7 encourage cooperative planning and financing of projects across political boundaries. Those provisions support regional flood mitigation projects through the Flood Infrastructure Fund. That should be especially helpful in the Lake Houston area where mitigation projects affect multiple counties and cities.
SB 500 Provides the Funding
SB 500 is an appropriations bill. It provides funding SB 7 and other items. It appropriates out of the state’s economic stabilization (rainy day) fund:
$273 million to provide matching funds for Hazard Mitigations Grants administered by FEMA.
$365 million to provide matching funds for Public Assistance Grants administered by FEMA.
Out of those two sums, it also appropriates $30 million that may only be used to provide a grant to Harris County to remove accumulated silt and sediment at the confluence of the San Jacinto River and Lake Houston, i.e., The Mouth Bar! That came from an amendment to SB 7 proposed by State Representative Dan Huberty when the House considered the Senate Bill.
It also provides, among many other things:
$47 million for community assistance
$793 million for flood infrastructure projects (drainage, flood mitigation and flood control projects)
$857 million for the Texas infrastructure resiliency fund
$13 million to the Lone Star College system for expenses related to Hurricane Harvey.
Rep. Dan Huberty says that since SB 500 is a supplemental appropriations bill, money from it should be available immediately, as soon as the Governor signs it.
A Big Thank You to Creighton and Huberty
The 85th legislature adjourned less than three months before Harvey inundated South Texas. That delayed legislative action two years. As a result, ever since Harvey, local officials have scrambled to organize and fund flood mitigation projects. The passage of these two bills should speed that process up by providing seed money for planning, grant writing, and matching funds. Thanks go to Senator Brandon Creighton and his staff for responding to the need and pushing these bills through the legislature. Thanks also go to Representative Dan Huberty for earmarking money for mouth bar dredging.
SB 500, a supplemental appropriations bill approved last weekend contains $30 million to help dredge the mouth bar on the West Fork of the San Jacinto.
With West Fork Phase One dredging rapidly winding down, hopefully the addition of $30 million to any money contributed by the City and FEMA will enable dredgers to restore conveyance of the West Fork.
Finally, we should give a big thank you to all of you who wrote letters in support of these two important pieces of legislation.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/28/2019
637 days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Harvey-SanJac_437-cropped-e1775595968700.jpg?fit=1100%2C456&ssl=14561100adminadmin2019-05-28 12:54:122019-05-28 13:07:03Passage of SB 7 and SB 500 Should Speed Up Flood Mitigation Projects
Map by LJA Engineering shows natural drainage. Purple outline shows boundaries of Figure Four Partners’ Woodridge Development.Dark gray outline shows extent of drainage area for Taylor Gully.All drainage in A-E flows to F.
According to residents in Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest, their homes never flooded before May 7th, 2019, including during Hurricane Harvey. Then bulldozers cleared the 262 acres north and west of them to create a new subdivision called Woodridge Village.
Reconstruction of Events
After talking with dozens of residents, mapping flood damage, reviewing flood videos, and photographing the aftermath, I think the following happened on May 7, 2019.
A large, long, linear ditch ran along the county line. Approximately half of this ditch (labeled S1 by the developer) bordered Sherwood Trails. Contractors had fully excavated the ditch but not fully finished it. The other half of the ditch that bordered Elm Grove did not yet have:
Red labels and circle have been added to approved drainage plan to make it easier to follow this discussion. Small black arrows indicate direction of flow.The 29-acre triangular area labeled N2 actually belongs to Montgomery County, which started cleared most of the land between 2006 and 2008.
Here’s an enlargement of the crucial S2 detention area that shows the flow. All water from the northern section of Woodridge, drains to the part of Taylor Gully running from the triangular detention area N2 on the left toward the upper right.
Note two u-turns made by the water within the space of 200 feet.
Several things happen when the water reaches the upper right.
Most of the runoff is forced to make a 120 degree right turn.
It’s joined by more water flowing south along the eastern edge of the property to the north, and the gas pipeline easement north of North Kingwood Forest.
All of that flows into a much smaller ditch…
…that narrows down into a 3′ pipe…
At that point, it is supposed to make another 90-degree turn into…
…a grassy-lined channel that conveys the water into S2
…where it mixes with stormwater from S1…
…and flows through a box culvert…
…into Taylor Gully where it’s joined by water shooting out of the 3′ pipe.
Here’s an even closer view of how all that works.
The Big Lebowski Connection
In the movie The Big Lebowski, Walter says to The Dude, “That’s right, Dude, the beauty of this is its simplicity. Once the plan gets too complex everything can go wrong.” And it did.
Of course, it was complicated by the facts that:
Most of S2 had not yet been excavated.
The grassy-lined channel to convey water from the upper part of Taylor Gulley into S2 had also not yet been excavated.
A reinforced concrete box culvert had been installed to reduce the outflow into the lower part of Taylor Gully. That backed water up.
A second reinforced concrete box culvert had not yet been installed farther up the ditch that might have held back some of the water that flowed into Elm Grove.
Critical Corner of Chaos
Jeff Miller, an Elm Grove resident who came within inches of flooding dubbed this corner of the development the “Critical Corner of Chaos.”
Jeff Miller schematicshowing series of problems near area that flooded.To his list, I would add the culvert across the ditch by the road that did not yet exist.
Photographs of debris patterns left in grass near the diagonal part of Taylor Gully show that water started overflowing the banks as far west as the road that crosses the ditch. From there, it headed straight south toward Elm Grove.
Debris from flood caught in grass high above ditch indicates that water went out of banks near the proposed street that connects the north and south sections of Woodridge.From here, the water headed overland toward Elm Grove in the background.
Also, when water started to make that 120 degree turn at the top of Miller’s diagram, it overflowed the banks into North Kingwood Forest. Part of the water also split off on the other side of the ditch and headed toward Elm Grove. The constrictions caused by:
Flowing from a large ditch into a smaller ditch
Flowing from the small ditch into a 3-foot pipe
Not enough detention excavated
Restricted outflow at the box culvert
…all forced water to flow into surrounding neighborhoods and down streets. Overland sheet flow added to street flooding already present raised the level of the water enough to enter at least 196 homes. The main paths that the water took looked something like this.
The red line shows the location of the buried 3′ pipe. Blue lines indicate the MAIN flow of water. Note, it also spilled out onto other side streets. This map shows the main flow, not the extent of flooding.
Current and Future Concerns
It’s been three weeks since the flooding. As the site continues to take shape, and as we officially enter hurricane season this week, several things should concern residents.
Rebel Contractors is far from having all the detention ponds excavated.
The dirt they have excavated is being used to elevate Woodridge above Elm Grove.
The drainage scheme LJA envisioned at the southeastern corner of the subdivision may not be sufficient in future heavy rains to prevent flooding in neighboring communities.
Taylor Gulley in Kingwood may not have sufficient conveyance to handle the volume of water coming from upstream development.
I mention this last point because older subdivisions in Porter along the western edge of Woodridge also flooded. Apparently, Woodridge blocked, at least partially drainage flowing from those areas. Therefore, less water came from that area than normal. Had it been added to the May 7th flood, things in Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest could have been even worse.
Dirt excavated from S2 Detention Pond is being used to raise elevation of land elsewhere in development. Homes along Needham Road in Porter are in background by cell tower.Jeff Miller, who helped with this analysis, stands on the original level of the land next to a street that will be about three feet above the elevation of Elm Grove. Miller stands 6′ tall. Note the fire plug at his eye level.
Urgent Recommendations
Before all of Woodridge Village becomes set in concrete, we need the best engineers in town to re-evaluate the LJA plans independently, especially at the “critical corner of chaos.” Then I hope the developer hires additional resources to ensure a verified or improved plan is executed before we hit the peak of hurricane season in August and September.
All thoughts in this post represent my opinions on matters of public policy and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/28/2019 with help from Jeff Miller
637 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Overall-Drainage-Red-Circle-1.jpg?fit=1500%2C1037&ssl=110371500adminadmin2019-05-27 21:51:392019-05-27 22:22:56More on What Went Wrong Near Elm Grove and How to Help Protect Residents from Future Flooding
AP Story Highlights Efforts to Streamline Buyout Process
According to an Associated Press (AP) story published this weekend, “A recent study for the National Institute of Building Sciences found that society as a whole saves $7 in avoided costs for every $1 spent through federally funded grants to acquire or demolish flood-prone buildings.”
Idea Behind Buyouts
Buyouts are a strategy used by FEMA to avoid multiple payouts from the National Flood Insurance Program for properties that flood over and over again. At some point, it becomes cheaper to buy the home and tear it down than to fix it repeatedly. However, buyouts can take years to process and they are always voluntary. Moreover, even if a homeowner decides not to sell, the government continues to underwrite his/her insurance.
The AP story by David A. Lieb cited the case of Mosby, Mo. Residents there flooded three times in six weeks in 2015. Many quickly signed up for buyouts, but are still waiting for offers years later.
With 7/1 savings, one wonders why it takes government so long to acquire these homes? Buyout experts that I talked to say that one of the keys to successfully negotiating a buyout is making people offers BEFORE they rebuild their homes. That observation argues for the need to streamline the buyout process, not drag it out for years.
Attempt to Streamline Buyouts
The AP story quotes U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. His committee has jurisdiction over FEMA. He questions why “….[we] keep selling them (flooded homeowners) insurance and building in the same place?”
The article continues: “DeFazio wants to expand and revamp a buyout process that he describes as inefficient and irrational. He’s backing a proposed pilot project that would give homeowners a break on their flood insurance premiums, as long as they agree in advance to a buyout that would turn their property into green space if their homes are substantially damaged by a flood.”
Status of Forest Cove Townhome Buyouts on Marina Drive
The buyout process from Harvey is just getting started in some parts of Texas. Harris County Flood Control has already bought out many homes in the Forest Cove area. “We’ve purchased three entire buildings. One has been demolished and two more are in process,” said James Wade of the Flood Control District. “We have about 65% of the units along Marina Drive purchased and are working through the remaining units.”
But over in Liberty County, officials have just started the buyout process. Buyouts require cooperation between the federal government which funds them, and city or county officials which negotiate them. Therefore, the success of buyout programs often depends on the interest level of cities and counties.
Buyout Success Often Depends on City or County
Counties that aggressively pursue buyout dollars from the federal government can offer residents an option that other counties can’t or don’t.
While most of the Marina Drive townhomes in Forest Cove are structurally unsound and therefore uninhabitable, residents elsewhere, such as Tammy Gunnels in unincorporated Montgomery County, have clamored for buyouts with no luck for years. With the May 7th rains, her home has flooded now 11 times in 10 years.
I applaud Representative DeFazio’s attempt to reform the buyout system. It seems like one of those rare instances when the humane thing to do is also the most cost-effective thing to do.
Turning Problems into Natural Retention and Recreation
A more efficient buyout process will also help rejuvenate and beautify neighborhoods. In the case of Forest Cove, the City of Houston Parks Board and Harris County Precinct Four are already working together to build a greenbelt trail. The trail would connect the County’s new Edgewater Park, under development at Hamblen and US59 with Kingwood’s trail system. That could also open up the entire Spring Creek greenbelt system to Kingwood and Forest Cove hikers and bikers. I can’t wait!
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/28/19
638 days since Hurricane Harvey
Passage of SB 7 and SB 500 Should Speed Up Flood Mitigation Projects
Six hundred and thirty-seven days after Hurricane Harvey, the Texas Legislature finally passed and funded a massive flood-relief bill, Senate Bill #7 (SB 7), sponsored by State Senator Brandon Creighton. The lengthy delay between Harvey and the bill’s passage underscores the need for Creighton’s bill.
Need for Faster Mitigation
Few government entities, it seems, budget for emergencies. So when a tragedy like Harvey happens, cities and counties scurry around looking for small grants. They use those to hire consultants to apply for other small grants that provide matching funds for even bigger grants from FEMA.
There’s even a two-step process to get on the list for grant consideration at the Federal level. You don’t just apply to FEMA or HUD. First, you have to file an application with the TDEM (Texas Division of Emergency Management, a part of DPS) before you can file an application with FEMA.
Most of the begging goes on behind the scenes, out of sight to the average citizen. The fact that the City or County has applied for a grant falls below the threshold of newsworthiness in most cases and so remains invisible to all but insiders. Once someone approves the grants, lengthy permitting processes further delay construction. It take years for a mitigation project to get to the construction phase. That’s when a project becomes newsworthy again.
Changing a Frustrating Process
This is why, to the average citizen, the pace of flood mitigation appears maddeningly and frighteningly slow. Important projects, such as additional dredging, gates for Lake Houston, and upstream detention, seem perpetually mired in government red tape.
The passage of Senate Bill (SB) 7 and SB 500 could help change that. The Senate and House have passed both bills, which are on their way to Governor Abbott’s desk. State Representative Dan Huberty says the governor supports both bills and that his signature is certain.
Here’s what they do:
Provisions in SB 7
SB 7 relates to flood planning, mitigation and infrastructure projects.
Provisions in SB 7 encourage cooperative planning and financing of projects across political boundaries. Those provisions support regional flood mitigation projects through the Flood Infrastructure Fund. That should be especially helpful in the Lake Houston area where mitigation projects affect multiple counties and cities.
SB 500 Provides the Funding
SB 500 is an appropriations bill. It provides funding SB 7 and other items. It appropriates out of the state’s economic stabilization (rainy day) fund:
It also provides, among many other things:
Rep. Dan Huberty says that since SB 500 is a supplemental appropriations bill, money from it should be available immediately, as soon as the Governor signs it.
A Big Thank You to Creighton and Huberty
The 85th legislature adjourned less than three months before Harvey inundated South Texas. That delayed legislative action two years. As a result, ever since Harvey, local officials have scrambled to organize and fund flood mitigation projects. The passage of these two bills should speed that process up by providing seed money for planning, grant writing, and matching funds. Thanks go to Senator Brandon Creighton and his staff for responding to the need and pushing these bills through the legislature. Thanks also go to Representative Dan Huberty for earmarking money for mouth bar dredging.
Finally, we should give a big thank you to all of you who wrote letters in support of these two important pieces of legislation.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/28/2019
637 days since Hurricane Harvey
More on What Went Wrong Near Elm Grove and How to Help Protect Residents from Future Flooding
According to residents in Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest, their homes never flooded before May 7th, 2019, including during Hurricane Harvey. Then bulldozers cleared the 262 acres north and west of them to create a new subdivision called Woodridge Village.
Reconstruction of Events
After talking with dozens of residents, mapping flood damage, reviewing flood videos, and photographing the aftermath, I think the following happened on May 7, 2019.
Before May 7th, contractors had finished clearing most of Woodridge Village’s 268 acres, most of which was hard clay. This accelerated runoff. They had also begun grading the land, filling in historical drainage channels and wetlands. But they had not yet totally completed any of the replacement drainage, even though one pond was substantially completed.
A large, long, linear ditch ran along the county line. Approximately half of this ditch (labeled S1 by the developer) bordered Sherwood Trails. Contractors had fully excavated the ditch but not fully finished it. The other half of the ditch that bordered Elm Grove did not yet have:
Here’s an enlargement of the crucial S2 detention area that shows the flow. All water from the northern section of Woodridge, drains to the part of Taylor Gully running from the triangular detention area N2 on the left toward the upper right.
Several things happen when the water reaches the upper right.
Here’s an even closer view of how all that works.
The Big Lebowski Connection
In the movie The Big Lebowski, Walter says to The Dude, “That’s right, Dude, the beauty of this is its simplicity. Once the plan gets too complex everything can go wrong.” And it did.
Of course, it was complicated by the facts that:
Critical Corner of Chaos
Jeff Miller, an Elm Grove resident who came within inches of flooding dubbed this corner of the development the “Critical Corner of Chaos.”
Photographs of debris patterns left in grass near the diagonal part of Taylor Gully show that water started overflowing the banks as far west as the road that crosses the ditch. From there, it headed straight south toward Elm Grove.
Also, when water started to make that 120 degree turn at the top of Miller’s diagram, it overflowed the banks into North Kingwood Forest. Part of the water also split off on the other side of the ditch and headed toward Elm Grove. The constrictions caused by:
…all forced water to flow into surrounding neighborhoods and down streets. Overland sheet flow added to street flooding already present raised the level of the water enough to enter at least 196 homes. The main paths that the water took looked something like this.
Current and Future Concerns
It’s been three weeks since the flooding. As the site continues to take shape, and as we officially enter hurricane season this week, several things should concern residents.
I mention this last point because older subdivisions in Porter along the western edge of Woodridge also flooded. Apparently, Woodridge blocked, at least partially drainage flowing from those areas. Therefore, less water came from that area than normal. Had it been added to the May 7th flood, things in Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest could have been even worse.
Urgent Recommendations
Before all of Woodridge Village becomes set in concrete, we need the best engineers in town to re-evaluate the LJA plans independently, especially at the “critical corner of chaos.” Then I hope the developer hires additional resources to ensure a verified or improved plan is executed before we hit the peak of hurricane season in August and September.
All thoughts in this post represent my opinions on matters of public policy and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/28/2019 with help from Jeff Miller
637 Days since Hurricane Harvey