11/2/25 – Hurricane Melissa disappeared off the tracking charts yesterday. And when it did, one of the most powerful storms in recorded history went into the history books.
Many things made Melissa unusual and stunned meteorologists. They included the storm’s deep pressure, high winds, rapid intensification, death toll, destruction, and its timing within the hurricane season.
And all of that happened in a season that has, so far, spared the U.S. mainland from any landfalling hurricanes.
A Normal Season
Usually, the Atlantic Hurricane season is largely over by the end of October.
One tropical storm, but no hurricanes have hit the US mainland so far this year.
In May this year, NOAA predicted an above average season with 13-19 named storms, of which 6-10 would become hurricanes, including 3-5 major hurricanes.
So far, we’ve had 13 named storms. Five became hurricanes, four of which reached major hurricane strength. See below.
Why So Strong, So Late?
First, we had very warm waters in the Caribbean – 1.9ºC to 2.8ºC above average for the region and season. That’s up to 5º F warmer than average.
More importantly: the warm layer extended to depth — meaning the storm could churn up deeper water without encountering cooler up-welled water that normally weakens storms.
Second, reduced wind sheer and steering currents caused it to meander slowly. This helped it sit over very warm waters while enhancing its strength.
Melissa underwent two rounds of rapid intensification, including a gain of ~70 mph in 24 hours — an “extreme rapid intensification” event. Because water was abnormally warm for that late in the season, and other inhibiting factors were low, the conditions aligned for a major hurricane even though the calendar was later.
Sea surface temperatures ordinarily decline and atmospheric conditions become less favorable this late in the season. But not this year. So, Melissa could reach peak strength even in late October. Some scientists hypothesize that climate change may have played a role. Others believe it was just the random confluence of favorable factors.
Warm water is necessary but not sufficient to create a major hurricane. In this case, the atmosphere cooperated, which is part of why Melissa could intensify so late and so rapidly.
Typically by late October, conditions become less favorable for hurricane formation (cooler oceans, increasing shear, etc.).
ABC News reported that at least two hurricane-hunter aircraft had to turn back from Hurricane Melissa due to extreme turbulence: one from the U.S. Air Force Reserve 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron and another from NOAA.
Melissa’s Eye. U.S. Air Force photo by Lt. Col. Mark Withee on Oct. 27, 2025.
Melissa made landfall in Jamaica with sustained winds of 185 mph, tying it for the strongest Atlantic hurricane landfall by wind speed. (Wikipedia+4AP News+4CBS News+4).
A scientist from the University of Miami onboard the Hurricane Hunter recorded a spot wind gust of 252 MPH. If verified, it will be the highest speed ever recorded in a tropical cyclone by a dropsonde. That rivals winds in EF5 tornadoes!
Melissa also recorded a central pressure of 892 mb, tying the record for third‐lowest minimum central pressure in the Atlantic basin. (CT Insider+1).
So far, Melissa is the strongest tropical cyclone of any kind worldwide in 2025.
USA Today reported today that the storm left more than 60 people dead in Haiti, Jamaica and the Dominican Republic.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/2/25
2987 Days since Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/20251102-Melissas-Eye.jpg?fit=1100%2C818&ssl=18181100adminadmin2025-11-02 20:30:042025-11-02 20:30:05How Could Hurricane Melissa Get So Strong So Late in the Season?
11/1/2025 – On 10/28/25, members of the Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force received a brief presentation about how flood-mitigation projects get prioritized by Harris County.
Below are several key slides from “Overview & History of the 2018 Bond Program’s Prioritization Framework.”
How Prioritization Started
Before the 2018 bond election on the anniversary of Hurricane Harvey, language was inserted into the proposal that voters went on to approve. Specifically, note Paragraph 14G. It called for developing a process for the “equitable expenditure of funds.”
Another year later, the county (under the guise of Harris Thrives) adopted two resolutions. The first instructed Harris County Flood Control District to adopt a framework for the equitable expenditure of Bond Program funds. The second set up a community-based Task Force.
“Harris Thrives” is the name of a resilience strategy adopted by Harris County after Harvey. It claims to be a “fast, fair, smart” approach to flood control, but also includes housing. Specifically it claims the county will be:
Fast: Cutting through red tape to complete flood-control projects quickly.
Fair: Prioritizing projects to help the most people as efficiently as possible, while ensuring vulnerable communities are never left behind.
Smart: Relying on science, technology, and data as a guide to be more proactive about how mitigation, preparation, and recovery.
Broad: Including programs for housing recovery, emergency preparedness, and community engagement.
Admirable goals. But it appears that Harris Thrives’ website has not been updated since February 2023, despite a promise to update it quarterly at that time. Only history and the Freedom of Information Act will tell us whether the county achieved those goals.
How Prioritization Framework Evolved
The Framework has gone through several iterations over time as commissioners’ priorities have changed.
After Harvey, the focus was speed.
Two years later, the focus was prioritizing certain projects and de-emphasizing others.
Five years later, the focus became tweaking the framework to ensure dollars went where commissioners wanted.
Six years later, commissioners asked HCFCD to rank projects already initiated into quartiles to ensure pet projects could be fully funded.
Eight years later, it became clear there wasn’t enough money to do all the projects promised in the flood bond. So commissioners voted to focus on projects in the top quartile.
Under previous management, HCFCD updated the status of every project for every commissioners court meeting. And those updates were posted online.
But since a change in management and priorities in 2022, it has been hard to identify where projects, budgets, and construction stands. Bond updates became annual as projects slowed to a crawl.
The old, simple-but-effective text-based lists with GANTT charts have been replaced by a series of somewhat confusing dashboards that work occasionally and with mixed effectiveness in different browsers.
Clicking on the dots calls up information about the associated project. But gone are the old, intuitive Gantt charts that gave you timing, lifecycle, and status information at a glance.
Sigh. At least they’re trying. And in fairness, they are improving. The Microsoft PowerBI spending charts on the HCFCD Activity Page are a valuable addition, even though that information is updated quarterly.
Changing Priorities
Through the years, priorities changed. The presentation showed the current scoring matrix.
2022 scoring matrix
However, it did not show the scoring matrix in the original 2019 Prioritization Framework. See below.
2019 scoring matrix
Comparison shows that flood-risk reduction and partnership funding (combined weight of 35%) have been eliminated from consideration. In their place, population and housing density (aka project efficiency) have increased by a similar amount. That favors projects near the city center, but eliminates severity of flooding as a consideration, which is why the largest watershed in the county with the worst flooding has received only 2% of spending to date.
Eliminating partnership funding is a curious switch, too, especially since more than half of bond-project funding relies on matching partnership dollars.
Search on the tag “equity prioritization” in the search bar of this website.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/1/25
2986 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/Prioritization-Priorities-scaled.png?fit=2560%2C1401&ssl=114012560adminadmin2025-11-01 16:22:312025-11-01 16:22:32Evolution of Harris County Flood-Project Prioritization
They told Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey and Houston City Council Member Fred Flickinger that they had “letters of no objection” (LONOs) from the Montgomery County Engineer and Harris County Flood Control District. See the red box on the page below.
LONO stands for Letter of No Objection.
The phrasing of the text implies “approval.” However, reading the text of the actual letters suggests that huge concerns remain about the project.
“…additional analysis will be required incorporating a definitive land plan.”
Brian Clark, PE, Montgomery County Engineer
Clark goes on to say that the land plan must be approved before any construction for any portion of the development can be approved. In addition, he says that additional analysis and construction plans must address Montgomery County’s following concerns:
Significant potential for erosion under homes, roads, utilities and bridge(s)
Need for emergency access and rescue planning during floods
Potential for increased floodplain levels due to future upstream development, which could place the entire project in the 100-year floodplain. “This creates a high risk of future flood blight, negatively impacting the tax base and endangering future residents,” he said.
Page 2 contains a lengthy list of information still required:
Detailed drainage master plan including specific lot, street, and detention pond sizing and locations.
Master plan that includes a comprehensive, no-rise, floodplain analysis for the 5-, 10-, 100- and 500-year Atlas 14 peak flows, along with drawings that show proposed grading and the extent of floodplain encroachment.
Atlas-14, 500-year water elevations in all models
Adequate mitigation for any fill in the 100-year floodplain
Develop and implement robust erosion control measures and geotechnical studies to ensure the long-term stability of the development
Design bridge and road network to guarantee adequate emergency access during the Atlas-14, 500-year storm
Analyze the proposed bridge location and describe how the proposed bridge will accommodate the dynamic (shifting) nature of Spring Creek
Emergency access plans must be approved by the county before any plans for sections in the subdivision will be reviewed
Submit documents indicating Army Corps approval, including any mitigation the Corps requires
Complete environmental due diligence documentation pertaining to Endangered Species Act
Approval of bridge plans by Harris County Flood Control District showing no modification to the main stem of Spring Creek will be required before MoCo provides any future letters of no objection.
Pages 2 and 3 contain cautions about:
Data and calculations made in the preliminary drainage analysis
A conditional letter of map revision (CLOMR) must be approved by FEMA before the county can approve bridge construction plans
The limited nature of the LONO itself.
The letter closes with a warning:
“This memorandum does not guarantee that the ‘developable areas’ presented in the report will remain unchanged as more information becomes available.”
Brian Clark, PE, Montgomery County Engineer
That sounds like quite a mountain to climb! Especially since MoCo Precinct 3 Commissioner Rich Wheeler took the Townsen Blvd. Extension off the County’s 2025 Road Bond. Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, PE, also vehemently opposes a bridge across Spring Creek. And the area upstream from this development is one of the fastest growing in the region…and the country, according to the Census Bureau.
Photos Make A More Compelling Case than Engineering Studies
Having spent years now studying how upstream development changes downstream assumptions about flooding, I hope this area does not get developed. Significant public safety concerns exist.
We should never forget what happened to Kingwood and Humble, and the I-69 and UnionPacific Railroad Bridges during Harvey.
Even if Scarborough/San Jacinto Preserve could build a bridge across Spring Creek, it would not form a reliable evacuation route in the event of another Harvey. Why? People coming south could be in floodwaters over their heads once they got off the bridge. See the pictures below.
Another view of Harvey at I-69. The Spring Creek bridge would come down in the flood, out of frame to the right.Water at this location reached 22 feet above flood stage.Townsen Road in Humble (center) where it crosses I-69. Photo courtesy of Harris County Flood Control District.I-69 during Harvey. Photo by Melinda Ray. So much for evacuation routes to the south.It took TXDoT almost a year to repair the I-69 bridge causing massive traffic jams on alternate routes.Harvey also destroyed the UnionPacific railroad bridge over the West Fork.
Even the I-45 and West Lake Houston Parkway bridges were damaged.
So, in my opinion, there is NO reliable evacuation route to the south. Period. End of story.
The developer can save his money on the engineering studies and cut his losses. The only way to salvage anything from this disaster-in-the-making is to donate the land to Texas Parks and Wildlife, take a tax deduction, and trumpet your concern for the environment.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/31/25
2985 Days since Hurricane Harvey
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/2021/05/TS-Harvey-8-30-17-209.jpg?fit=1024%2C768&ssl=17681024adminadmin2025-10-31 17:53:272025-11-01 12:36:21Supposed “Letter of No Objection” to Floodplain Development Lists 3 Pages of Objections
How Could Hurricane Melissa Get So Strong So Late in the Season?
11/2/25 – Hurricane Melissa disappeared off the tracking charts yesterday. And when it did, one of the most powerful storms in recorded history went into the history books.
Many things made Melissa unusual and stunned meteorologists. They included the storm’s deep pressure, high winds, rapid intensification, death toll, destruction, and its timing within the hurricane season.
And all of that happened in a season that has, so far, spared the U.S. mainland from any landfalling hurricanes.
A Normal Season
Usually, the Atlantic Hurricane season is largely over by the end of October.
But this season was different.
This Season
Melissa was the 13th named storm of the season.
In May this year, NOAA predicted an above average season with 13-19 named storms, of which 6-10 would become hurricanes, including 3-5 major hurricanes.
So far, we’ve had 13 named storms. Five became hurricanes, four of which reached major hurricane strength. See below.
Why So Strong, So Late?
First, we had very warm waters in the Caribbean – 1.9ºC to 2.8ºC above average for the region and season. That’s up to 5º F warmer than average.
More importantly: the warm layer extended to depth — meaning the storm could churn up deeper water without encountering cooler up-welled water that normally weakens storms.
Second, reduced wind sheer and steering currents caused it to meander slowly. This helped it sit over very warm waters while enhancing its strength.
Melissa underwent two rounds of rapid intensification, including a gain of ~70 mph in 24 hours — an “extreme rapid intensification” event. Because water was abnormally warm for that late in the season, and other inhibiting factors were low, the conditions aligned for a major hurricane even though the calendar was later.
Sea surface temperatures ordinarily decline and atmospheric conditions become less favorable this late in the season. But not this year. So, Melissa could reach peak strength even in late October. Some scientists hypothesize that climate change may have played a role. Others believe it was just the random confluence of favorable factors.
Warm water is necessary but not sufficient to create a major hurricane. In this case, the atmosphere cooperated, which is part of why Melissa could intensify so late and so rapidly.
Typically by late October, conditions become less favorable for hurricane formation (cooler oceans, increasing shear, etc.).
One For the Record Books
One study estimated that the extra warming of the ocean helped boost Melissa’s maximum wind speed by about 10 mph and increased its damage potential by ~50%.
ABC News reported that at least two hurricane-hunter aircraft had to turn back from Hurricane Melissa due to extreme turbulence: one from the U.S. Air Force Reserve 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron and another from NOAA.
Melissa made landfall in Jamaica with sustained winds of 185 mph, tying it for the strongest Atlantic hurricane landfall by wind speed. (Wikipedia+4AP News+4CBS News+4).
A scientist from the University of Miami onboard the Hurricane Hunter recorded a spot wind gust of 252 MPH. If verified, it will be the highest speed ever recorded in a tropical cyclone by a dropsonde. That rivals winds in EF5 tornadoes!
Melissa also recorded a central pressure of 892 mb, tying the record for third‐lowest minimum central pressure in the Atlantic basin. (CT Insider+1).
So far, Melissa is the strongest tropical cyclone of any kind worldwide in 2025.
USA Today reported today that the storm left more than 60 people dead in Haiti, Jamaica and the Dominican Republic.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/2/25
2987 Days since Harvey
Evolution of Harris County Flood-Project Prioritization
11/1/2025 – On 10/28/25, members of the Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force received a brief presentation about how flood-mitigation projects get prioritized by Harris County.
Below are several key slides from “Overview & History of the 2018 Bond Program’s Prioritization Framework.”
How Prioritization Started
Before the 2018 bond election on the anniversary of Hurricane Harvey, language was inserted into the proposal that voters went on to approve. Specifically, note Paragraph 14G. It called for developing a process for the “equitable expenditure of funds.”
Another year later, the county (under the guise of Harris Thrives) adopted two resolutions. The first instructed Harris County Flood Control District to adopt a framework for the equitable expenditure of Bond Program funds. The second set up a community-based Task Force.
“Harris Thrives” is the name of a resilience strategy adopted by Harris County after Harvey. It claims to be a “fast, fair, smart” approach to flood control, but also includes housing. Specifically it claims the county will be:
Admirable goals. But it appears that Harris Thrives’ website has not been updated since February 2023, despite a promise to update it quarterly at that time. Only history and the Freedom of Information Act will tell us whether the county achieved those goals.
How Prioritization Framework Evolved
The Framework has gone through several iterations over time as commissioners’ priorities have changed.
Commissioners later also agreed to follow up on projects that had already received partnership funds (not shown above).
Regaining Transparency
Under previous management, HCFCD updated the status of every project for every commissioners court meeting. And those updates were posted online.
But since a change in management and priorities in 2022, it has been hard to identify where projects, budgets, and construction stands. Bond updates became annual as projects slowed to a crawl.
The old, simple-but-effective text-based lists with GANTT charts have been replaced by a series of somewhat confusing dashboards that work occasionally and with mixed effectiveness in different browsers.
Clicking on the dots calls up information about the associated project. But gone are the old, intuitive Gantt charts that gave you timing, lifecycle, and status information at a glance.
Sigh. At least they’re trying. And in fairness, they are improving. The Microsoft PowerBI spending charts on the HCFCD Activity Page are a valuable addition, even though that information is updated quarterly.
Changing Priorities
Through the years, priorities changed. The presentation showed the current scoring matrix.
However, it did not show the scoring matrix in the original 2019 Prioritization Framework. See below.
Comparison shows that flood-risk reduction and partnership funding (combined weight of 35%) have been eliminated from consideration. In their place, population and housing density (aka project efficiency) have increased by a similar amount. That favors projects near the city center, but eliminates severity of flooding as a consideration, which is why the largest watershed in the county with the worst flooding has received only 2% of spending to date.
Eliminating partnership funding is a curious switch, too, especially since more than half of bond-project funding relies on matching partnership dollars.
For More Information
Those who would like more information can:
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/1/25
2986 Days since Hurricane Harvey
Supposed “Letter of No Objection” to Floodplain Development Lists 3 Pages of Objections
10/31/25 – On 10/29/25, Scarborough Development/San Jacinto Preserve pitched their plans to develop 5,372 acres in Montgomery County and build a bridge across Spring Creek to Harris County.
They told Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey and Houston City Council Member Fred Flickinger that they had “letters of no objection” (LONOs) from the Montgomery County Engineer and Harris County Flood Control District. See the red box on the page below.
The phrasing of the text implies “approval.” However, reading the text of the actual letters suggests that huge concerns remain about the project.
Montgomery County Concerns
The letter from Brian Clark, Montgomery County engineer, dated 7/2/25 or one month before Ryko sold the land to Scarborough Development/San Jacinto Preserve, has no objection to the preliminary information provided but goes on to list three pages of concerns. They start with an underlined phrase in the second paragraph.
Clark goes on to say that the land plan must be approved before any construction for any portion of the development can be approved. In addition, he says that additional analysis and construction plans must address Montgomery County’s following concerns:
Page 2 contains a lengthy list of information still required:
Pages 2 and 3 contain cautions about:
The letter closes with a warning:
That sounds like quite a mountain to climb! Especially since MoCo Precinct 3 Commissioner Rich Wheeler took the Townsen Blvd. Extension off the County’s 2025 Road Bond. Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Tom Ramsey, PE, also vehemently opposes a bridge across Spring Creek. And the area upstream from this development is one of the fastest growing in the region…and the country, according to the Census Bureau.
Text of Letters
Here is the entire letter, obtained via a FOIA request.
And here is the entire letter from HCFCD. It expresses many of the same concerns.
Photos Make A More Compelling Case than Engineering Studies
Having spent years now studying how upstream development changes downstream assumptions about flooding, I hope this area does not get developed. Significant public safety concerns exist.
We should never forget what happened to Kingwood and Humble, and the I-69 and UnionPacific Railroad Bridges during Harvey.
Even if Scarborough/San Jacinto Preserve could build a bridge across Spring Creek, it would not form a reliable evacuation route in the event of another Harvey. Why? People coming south could be in floodwaters over their heads once they got off the bridge. See the pictures below.
Even the I-45 and West Lake Houston Parkway bridges were damaged.
So, in my opinion, there is NO reliable evacuation route to the south. Period. End of story.
For more photos from Harvey, see Dawn of a Disaster.
The developer can save his money on the engineering studies and cut his losses. The only way to salvage anything from this disaster-in-the-making is to donate the land to Texas Parks and Wildlife, take a tax deduction, and trumpet your concern for the environment.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/31/25
2985 Days since Hurricane Harvey
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.