A February update by Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) on the status of the 2018 Flood Bond showed that 35% of the way into the program (42 out of 120 months), 19.4% of the funds from all sources (including grants and partnerships) had been spent. That percentage was based on $967 million spent out of $5 billion projected.
Cost of Studies vs. Construction
While one percentage seems to lag the other by a factor of almost 2X, HCFCD estimates it is virtually on schedule. That’s because studies conducted up front cost far less than construction. And only 44 of 181 Bond program projects have entered construction at this point (24%). As more projects enter the construction phase, the pace of spending should accelerate.
From High-Level Summary to Nitty-Gritty Detail
The 13-page update features three major sections:
Summary statistics for the entire bond program
Project flow charts showing status of all projects
Watershed maps showing the amount spent to date; funded to date; and the values of all active maintenance and capital projects.
Spending by watershed on HCFCD flood bond projects through the end of February 2022.
Skewed Distribution of Capital Improvement Projects
Out of 75 active capital improvement projects, I counted only 13 in Precincts 3 and 4 which have Republican commissioners. Those contracts totaled only about $82 million out of about $249 million. That’s a testament to how thoroughly the Democrat-controlled Commissioners Court has relentlessly tweaked the Equity Prioritization Framework. For instance…
In northeastern Harris County, the update shows only two active capital projects valued at a whopping $1,000 each.
Of the 13 active capital projects in Precincts 3 and 4, six are E&R contracts valued at just $6,125 altogether. See page 13. The report lists no E&R contracts in Precincts 1 and 2.
Excavation and removal contracts let contractors sell dirt they remove from a site as a way of making back their normal profit margin. They’re a good deal for taxpayers as long as the demand for fill dirt remains high. But if demand slows, excavation progress could stall. In other words, they come with uncertainty attached.
Breakdown of San Jacinto Watershed Projects
Of ten bond projects listed in the San Jacinto Watershed, schedules show:
The February report did not address a method of distribution for $750 million allocated by HUD and the GLO for flood mitigation to Harris County. The award happened on March 18, 2022 and will likely be covered next month.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/30/2022
1674 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Screen-Shot-2022-03-30-at-5.22.09-PM.png?fit=1844%2C1402&ssl=114021844adminadmin2022-03-30 17:55:032022-03-30 21:57:58Flood Bond Progress: 35% Time Elapsed, 19.4% Money Spent
In the rush to mitigate flooding after Hurricane Harvey, most people agreed that we should attack the areas with the worst flooding first. While almost everyone agreed with the “worst first” mantra, no one defined it – until after the flood bond passed.
Alternative Ways to Define “Worst First”
How would you define the “worst” flooding? The area with the:
Most flooded homes?
Most frequent flooding?
Most damage in dollar terms?
Largest population living in a 100-year floodplain?
Most low-to-moderate income residents who can least afford to fix their homes?
Largest minority populations?
Highest Social Vulnerability Index (SVI)?
Most damage to infrastructure (bridges, hospitals, grocery stores, schools, sewage treatment plants, etc.)?
Highest water above the tops of banks in a widespread storm like Harvey?
You could make valid arguments for each. And people have – almost from the day the flood bond passed – as they fought for more funding for their watersheds.
Yesterday, as I reviewed a doctoral thesis from a student at the Colorado School of Mines, I saw a graph that compared the height of the Harvey flood at the San Jacinto West Fork and US59 to other rivers/streams in the region. The West Fork flood towered above the others. So it made me wonder. How did the flood at that location compare to other streams and bayous in Harris County?
Click on the “For more information” link in the pop-up box.
On the new page (dedicated to historical information about that gage), click on the stream elevation tab.
Note the “flooding likely” elevation. This roughly coincides with the top of bank, though banks can vary slightly.
Scroll down to the bottom of the page and note the elevation of the flood at that location during Hurricane Harvey.
Subtract the “flooding likely” level from the Harvey level, to determine the feet above flood stage in Harvey.
Click on the drop-down box with the gage information to compare the same stats for additional gages.
North Harris County Had Highest Floods
This morning, I compiled the data for 33 gages. The chart below shows what I found. Of the gages I sampled, the four highest floods all occurred in the upper San Jacinto River Basin: West Fork at 59, Spring Creek at 45, Cypress Creek at Cypresswood, and West Fork at 99. Also note the preponderance of high water along Greens Bayou at numerous locations.
“Feet above Flood Stage” by itself won’t tell you which area had the worst flooding during Harvey. It’s just one measure. You must consider other factors, too, such as those listed above.
One must also acknowledge the role that topography plays in a chart, such as this. A narrow floodplain with steep banks can force water higher. A wider floodplain through a flat area allows water to spread out, lowering the height of floodwaters.
Variations in rainfall across an area can also skew results.
And finally, I didn’t click on every gage in the region. There are hundreds. You wouldn’t have been able to read the chart because the type would have been so small. So investigate on your own and let me know what you find.
Need for Active Discussion/Debate in Upcoming Elections
The Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force just voted to change the way “worst first” is calculated – again! The highest correlation between funding and all of the other factors I have evaluated is now with low-to-moderate-income population. It’s not with damaged structures, dollar damage, watershed size, or population density.
If you want to ensure that outlying areas get their fair share of flood mitigation dollars in the future, you need to demand them when you go to the polls this fall.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/29/2022
1673 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/2022/03/Feet-Above-Flood-Stage-in-Harvey-e1699502224912.png?fit=1100%2C729&ssl=17291100adminadmin2022-03-29 15:57:372022-03-30 10:13:01How Do You Define “Worst First”?
Since my last post on the Laurel Springs RV Resort, contractors have erected approximately 2000 feet of chain link fence, much of it within feet of Laurel Springs Lane. Exxon Land Development Commercial Development Guidelines generally prohibited chain link fencing except in rare instances where the fence was “not visible from the street or adjacent property.” See Section II-9-3 Screen Walls and Fencing and the pictures below.
Chain link fence along Laurel Springs Lane. Looking north. Photo taken 2/26.
Chain link fence between Edgewater Park and RV Park.
Because Exxon never owned this property, it was not subject to the deed restrictions that apply to Kingwood. So I’m not alleging anything illegal. However, the developer has disregarded community norms. Those deed restrictions give the Kingwood Area its distinctive character. Disregarding them has not endeared the developer to neighbors.
Other “Improvements”
The developer also made several other “improvements” in the last few days. He has:
Removed more trees
Brought in more dirt to raise the property even higher above Lakewood Cove
Approximately doubled the area covered by concrete
Finally erected a silt fence on the west side by the utility corridor, five months into construction
Hydroseeded the south bank of the detention pond and northern part of Edgewater Park where they cut down trees…after severe erosion caused Harris County to threaten a lawsuit.
However, there still appears to be no effort to replant the trees they cut in Edgewater Park. Nor have they placed permanent pumps to drain the retention pond; they’re still attempting to do that with portable pumps.
Photos Taken 3/28/2022
Here’s how the site looked tonight.
The amount of concrete virtually doubled. They poured the dark gray area in the foreground last Saturday.A swimming pool will go between the concrete and the building under construction.
More downed trees litter the northern part of the property. Trucks have been bringing in more dirt to fill in low spots which became apparent after last week’s 2″ rain.
Looking E toward Lakewood Cove and Laurel Springs Laneas crews finish spraying for the day.
The hydroseeding crews were pulling silty water from the detention pond to mix with their material, even as portable pumps attempt to drain the pond before the next rainarrives tomorrow night.
More about Hydroseeding
Contractors use hydroseeding to stabilize slopes and accelerate the germination of grass which can reduce erosion. Water, seed, and nutrients are mixed into a gelatinous material and sprayed onto the ground. The gelatin adheres to slopes and retains just enough moisture to help the seed take root. We should see grass start to grow within 5-10 days. Crews add colored dye to the mix to make it easier to see. That helps them spray it evenly.
Thankfully, at least the chain link fence does not have razor wire on top of it. Regardless, it has all the charm of the prison in Huntsville.
While you review the Commercial Development Guidelines on fencing, scan the rest of the guidelines, too. Especially the ones that talk about setbacks, construction fencing, parking, tree preservation and more. They will give you a greater appreciation for the care taken by thousands who came before the Laurel Springs RV Resort.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/28/2022
1672 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/2022/03/20220326-RJR_9317.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2022-03-28 22:38:492022-03-31 12:11:25Chain Link Fencing at Laurel Springs RV Resort Would Not Meet Exxon Land Development Commercial Guidelines
The San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) recently completed a 246-page conceptual design study, in partnership with the Harris County Flood Control District, that explored the feasibility of implementing sediment trapping facilities (“sand traps”). The purpose: to remove sediment from the West or East Fork of the San Jacinto River. The results and findings of this study have been documented in an engineering report entitled “San Jacinto River and Tributaries Sediment Removal and Sand Trap Development.”
Prior to proceeding to preliminary engineering design and any subsequent project phases, SJRA is seeking public input on the proposed project alternatives detailed in the report. The full report, as well as a brief summary document, are located on SJRA’s Flood Management Division website.
Caution: The full study is dated 1/7/22. But the “brief summary” is dated 3/9/22. Make sure you at least read the executive study of the full report as well as the brief summary. There are important differences.
Overview/Purpose
SJRA says the purpose of the sediment trap study was to assess the feasibility of implementing a pilot project to trap and remove sediment from the West OR East Fork of the San Jacinto. The study only assessed locations where one or more Aggregate Production Operations (APOs) could partner with the the SJRA. They restricted the study this way to reduce costs; the SJRA does not have a source of funding to clean out sand traps and would rely on sand miners.
Initial Concerns
The decisions to:
Define the study objective as sediment reduction, not damage reduction and…
Only consider locations near sand mines…
…give me mixed emotions about this project.
Pros
On one hand, I look at this and say, “It’s a pilot project. Try it and see if there’s a benefit.” Sediment IS a problem and they believe they can remove up to 100% of the annual sediment load (from the West Fork).
Cons
On the other hand, the study authors, Freese & Nichols (F&N) claimed (in the San Jacinto River Basin Master Drainage Study) that of all the sediment coming into Lake Houston, two thirds comes from Spring and Cypress Creeks while only 13% comes from the West Fork upstream of US59.
Perhaps that’s because they’re using model inputs from a sediment gage at I-45 located 8.5 miles upstream from most of the large West Fork sand mines (page 34, paragraph 3 of full study).
The “Mouth Bar,” a giant sand bar that blocked the West Fork of the San Jacinto, backing the river up into Kingwood and Humble. Thousands of homes and businesses flooded behind this blockage. The above-water portion has since been removed, but most of the underwater portion remains.
In the entire 246-page F&N study and the three-page summary, the word “damage” occurs only once…in relation to erosion damage, NOT flood damage.
It appears that F&N did not even look at creating sand traps where they were most needed, in the headwaters of Lake Houston, because of cost and logistical considerations. Yet the Army Corps, City of Houston, and State of Texas are spending $200 million to dredge that area. One wonders whether SJRA should have looked harder for partners to clean out the traps.
Finally, if sediment traps only work financially near sand mines, the “solution” will not work on other tributaries that F&N alleges contribute 5X more sediment than the West Fork. They just don’t have the sand mines that the West Fork has.
Nature of Proposed Solution
Five years after Harvey, we have a conceptual design and a recommended location: rock-lined channels cut through one or two point bars at the West Fork Hallett mine.
The shot below shows the same area in real life. To put the magnitude of the proposed solution into perspective, the solution would cover a little more than an acre. But sand mines like Hallett cover 20 square miles on the banks of the West Fork between US59 and I-45.
2021 photo of sand bar outsde Hallett mine that would have a narrow channel cut through it to trap sand.
My Biggest Fears
My biggest fears with the proposed pilot study are that it:
Asks people to chose from a limited menu.
Could divert attention from better solutions that would reduce flood risk faster in the headwaters of Lake Houston.
Might make the public think the problem is solved.
Could open the door to river mining and further destabilize the riverine environment.
Is not a transferrable solution.
For a pilot study, that last point is troubling.
Also, F&N worries that removing too much sediment from the West Fork could create a “hungry-water” effect that increases erosion downstream. But they have no way of directly measuring how much sediment the West Fork transports. Or what percentage they would remove. That’s because they’re relying on a sediment gage upstream from the sand mines. This introduces an element of risk in the pilot study.
Recommendations Should Be Based on a Holistic Examination of Alternatives
Note lack of vegetation on this steep-sided, eroding bank of Hallett mine on West Fork in foreground.
Before moving forward with the pilot study, I suggest a more holistic examination of additional alternatives that might have a greater impact on reducing flood damage, not just sedimentation. Examples include, but are not limited to:
More on the sand trap proposal in coming days. In the meantime, please review the SJRA’s sediment trap proposal and forward your comments to the SJRA. I will also print thoughtful letters, both pro and con, from responsible parties. Send them to: https://reduceflooding.com/contact-us/.
Posted by Bob Rehak on March 27, 2022
1671 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/2022/03/20210303-RJR_5381.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2022-03-27 21:14:502022-03-28 01:10:10SJRA Seeks Public Input on Sediment Trap Proposal
After an unannounced investigation of the Laurel Springs RV Resort construction site on February 2, 2022, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) issued a Notice of Enforcement (NOE) Letter to the contractor, Higbie Ventures of Texas, Inc. The TCEQ investigation found Higbie:
Failed to maintain Best Management Practices in effective operation condition
Had not maintained the construction site entrance
Did not protect stormwater inlets
Damaged erosion controls
Improperly installed erosion controls
Did not install erosion controls as prescribed in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan along the southern and western perimeters
Let sediment accumulations travel offsite unimpeded onto neighboring property for approximately 158 yards
Trenched the southern berm of its detention pond, letting stormwater escape onto neighboring property, a non-compliant discharge
Violated requirements of their Construction General Permit
Failed to remove sediment accumulations often enough to minimize further negative effect
The investigator felt the non-compliant discharge in late January warranted enforcement action. The TCEQ then issued a Notice of Enforcement Letter (NOE) to “facilitate” compliance.
64-Page Report Brims With Photos Showing Violations
The TCEQ investigator, Kyle Linville, required documentation showing the contractor had remedied all violations by February 7. But on February 14, Linville noted that several violations remained outstanding, including failure to:
Maintain Best Management Practices in effective operating condition
Install sediment controls on the southern boundary of the site
Remove sediment accumulations often enough to minimize further negative effects.
Linville’s observations largely match mine and those of nearby residents who have communicated with me re: issues at the controversial construction site. Strangely, a City of Houston investigation found no problem, triggering two more investigations, but the City has not yet released the results of those.
Contractor Apparently Still Not Fully in Compliance
Since the TCEQ issued its notice of enforcement letter, most but not all of the violations have been corrected. However, Higbie still has not installed silt fencing along the western perimeter. And when I went by there today, trucks had once again turned Laurel Springs Lane into a muddy mess.
Photo taken on 2/2/22 from TCEQ report showing erosion of southern wall of detention pond.Sediment eroded into Edgewater Park for approximately 158 yards.Another photo from TCEQ report.More sediment farther into park.Another photo from TCEQ report.Note lack of silt fencing along western perimeter (right), which had been mentioned in TCEQ complaint dated 2/2/22. Photo taken 3/24/22, six weeks after compliance deadline.
Contractor Claims Re: Unauthorized Discharge
The contractor admitted that he discharged stormwater into Edgewater Park without authorization. However, he claimed that it was necessary to begin installing pumps that would discharge stormwater into the Lakewood Cove Storm Sewer System. The contractor claimed that standing water in the detention pond had infiltrated the soil in the pond wall. That made the pond wall so unstable that heavy equipment could not operate safely on the wall, said the contractor, in his response to the TCEQ.
However, photos taken on the day of the trenching, 1/29/22, show heavy equipment already operating on the wall and the pump housing already partially installed.
Photo taken 1/29/22 shows contractor draining pond as heavy equipment operates elsewhere on pond wall.
On page 54 of the report, the contractor claims he dug the trench on 1/30/22, not 1/29.
He also admits that he placed 8″ pipe in the wall, but claims he removed it “the next day” on “1/31/21.” That would have been 10 months before the site was even cleared. But assuming he meant 1/31/22, the claim doesn’t match what I photographed that day. I photographed the contractor covering up pipe, not removing it. See below.
One photo from a sequence taken on 1/31/2022 that shows contractor pulling dirt into trench and spreading it over pipes.
Is he claiming that he filled in the whole trench only to redig it on the same day and remove the pipe? That would have been amazingly inefficient. However, it would help explain some of the contractor’s failures. In the last 20 years, eight of Higbie’s 13 entities in Texas have gone out of business. He lost six of the eight to tax forfeitures.
Trust But Verify
Mr. Linville produced an excellent and thorough report of his investigation. But I hope he explores some of Higbie’s claims further without just taking Higbie’s word that he complied. As auditors say, “Trust but verify.” Did the contractor really remove the pipe? Did he install invisible silt fence on the western perimeter? Why is Higbie still pumping water out of the pond with portable pumps almost two months after installing the housing for permanent pumps.
We should never forget how excess sedimentation contributed to the flooding of thousands of homes along the West Fork during Harvey.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/26/22
1670 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.
00adminadmin2022-03-26 17:52:282022-03-26 18:02:05TCEQ Issues Notice of Enforcement to Laurel Springs RV Resort
Rachel Tolbert Kimbro, a professor of sociology at Rice, has produced the rarest of commodities: an easily readable book, rich with academic value. In Too Deep: Class and Mothering in a Flooded Community is the story of 36 upper middle-class mothers on Houston’s southwest side before, during, and after Hurricane Harvey. It’s about:
Why they chose the neighborhood they live in – despite knowledge of prior floods
Their struggle to survive during Harvey
The fight to recover after the storm – financially, physically and psychologically – while holding their families together
Why most chose to stay instead of move, despite repeated floods.
Common Themes
Professor Rachel Tolbert Kimbro, Rice University Photo.
Professor Kimbro interviewed the women extensively over the course of several years and found common themes between their stories. Among them: the struggle to protect their children, neighborhood, school, and friendships. The values they found in their neighborhood – affordability, diversity, walkability, a good school, safety, and a supportive network of neighbors – brought them together. And fear of losing those values after the flood kept them from moving elsewhere. Sound familiar? You could substitute “proximity to nature” for “proximity to museums” and understand why so many flood victims chose to stay in the Lake Houston Area after Harvey.
Qualitative Research Yields Insights
For In Too Deep, Kimbro used structured qualitative research, not quantitative. The result is a moving narrative, replete with insight and pathos. It mirrors, in a different part of Houston, many of the interviews I have done in the Lake Houston Area since Harvey.
Those who flooded will find painful memories and, ultimately, a sense of kinship that comes from a recognition of their shared struggles. Kimbro’s description of rescues by kayak; of several families crowding into one upstairs room with their pets; of struggles with contractors and adjusters; and of families sleeping on air mattresses for more than a year will bring many people to tears.
Policy makers will gain insights into what makes buyouts so difficult despite such difficulties. The book explains why many people in this neighborhood wanted to stay put after Harvey despite prior, severe flooding during the Tax and Memorial Day storms.
Kimbro’s editorial decision to focus only on women in one area and from one social class limits her research somewhat. But what it loses in breadth, it gains in depth. There is little academic research into how upper middle-class moms cope with disasters. Most research on flooding focuses on less affluent, communities of color.
Spoiler Alert
Professor Kimbro recreated the Harvey experience completely and faithfully from the standpoint of her interviewees. Women in the Lake Houston Area will likely identify with the struggles Kimbro’s subjects faced. Spoiler alert: keep a box of tissues handy when you read this book.
Kimbro changed women’s names and even the name of their neighborhood to protect their privacy and confidentiality. Many of the women felt almost violated from having neighbors and contractors traipse through the private spaces in their homes (bedrooms, bathrooms, etc.) to rip out wallboard, tile, and carpet. I just wish she had mentioned the fictitious neighborhood name in the introduction, not at the end.
Throughout the book, she refers to the neighborhood as “Bayou Oaks” and the school that the children go to as “Bayou Oaks Elementary.”
I wanted so much to photograph this neighborhood that I Googled the names to find their locations. I also tried to look them up in multiple map apps and Google Earth. No joy! There is no Bayou Oaks Elementary in the Houston ISD. And there is no Bayou Oaks where she described it.
As a consequence, at times I wondered how real In Too Deep was. But it is very real.
Suggestion for Future Research
One thing struck me as odd though. Unless I missed it on first reading, none of the women focused on political action (lobbying for flood mitigation) as a solution to their flood woes. None of these mothers turned into political activists lobbying for flood mitigation dollars – despite their fear of future floods.
In contrast, less affluent, predominantly minority communities seize headlines and more dollars every week. Why the difference? Is it financial desperation? Lack of alternatives? Or something cultural?
This is certainly an area for future investigation. And I hope Kimbro takes it up. She’s both a talented researcher and storyteller. We have a lot to learn from her.
In Too Deep comes in paperback, hardbound and digital editions. I purchased the Kindle edition from Amazon. I highly recommend it.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/25/2022
1669 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/kimbro20141.jpg?fit=300%2C300&ssl=1300300adminadmin2022-03-25 12:21:372022-03-25 16:49:16Review: In Too Deep – Class and Mothering in a Flooded Community
Note: Updated 3/26/22 to correct drainage path from Peppervine to West Fork instead of Bens Branch.
Centex Homes, an affiliate of Pulte Homes, has cleared land for a new 47-acre development in Porter just north of Oakhurst. The developer will call the new development Peppervine and is targeting first-time homebuyers and young, budget-conscious homebuyers.
Few Details Available Yet About Homes
Centex doesn’t give many details about the homes yet. The company’s website contains only one page of high-level information. However, it does say that the builder will offer both one- and two-story homes. Their website shows a fairly traditional style that would fit in well with most homes in the Kingwood Area.
Entrance to Peppervine. Looking east toward US59. As with Oakhurst to the south/right, a large stand of trees will shield residents from freeway noise.
However, the only other trees are in the northwest corner of the new subdivision to help shield residents from an RV park.
Looking SE toward 59. A small stand of trees will shield residents from an RV park (lower left). Oakhurst drainage ditch in lower right. Detention pond empties into ditch that cuts through upper right of frame.
Impact on Drainage
Of course, ReduceFlooding readers are concerned about the impact on drainage. While regrettable, the loss of more trees will be at least partially offset by a fairly large detention pond that occupies approximately 20% of the site. See above.
The Montgomery County Appraisal District shows the development, which comprises approximately 1.7 million square feet will have a detention pond that covers approximately 324,000 square feet.
The site will use Oakhurst’s drainage ditch which connects to the headwaters of Bens Branch. See Google Earth Pro image below.
Path of Drainage to West Fork
Peppervine in rectangle will drain through the Oakhurst drainage ditch to West Fork San Jacinto.Note even bigger area slated for development across freeway. It will drain into Bens Branch.Looking SE. Pepperdine’s detention pond will connect to the small drainage ditch in the upper right.Looking NE. The small drainage ditch will connect to Oakhurst’s larger ditch (lower left).Looking north.The site’s detention pond drains into the ditch in the foreground which connects to the Oakhurst Ditch on the left.
Homes Built Above Roads
Homebuyers will be pleased that the homes will be built up from the roadways.
Homes will be elevated above the roads, always a good practice.
Sizable Detention Pond Should Help Allay Concerns
During Harvey and Imelda, multiple homes flooded in Oakhurst. I’m sure Oakhurst residents must have concerns about yet another subdivision adding even more runoff to the ditches and stream. The good news here, though, is that Montgomery County required a rather sizable detention pond in this instance. The developer did not get to avoid detention with a beat-the-peak survey.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/24/2022
1668 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/2022/03/20220310-DJI_0709.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=17991200adminadmin2022-03-24 17:50:052022-03-26 20:33:16Oakhurst Getting New Neighbor: Land Cleared for Peppervine
After a 2 inch rain on 3/22/22, the construction site at the Laurel Springs RV Resort turned into a giant mud bath, now being pumped into the Lakewood Cove storm sewer system. The whole point of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan approved by the TCEQ is to prevent that.
Is This Part of A Bigger Marketing Plan?
Large ponds of muddy water covered the site from north to south and east to west, a tribute to the drainage still not installed after five months of site work. It makes one wonder whether the contractor’s tardiness is part of a marketing ploy.
Do they plan to market this RV resort as a mud bath/spa? Will they offer a special pit for ladies’ mud wrestling on WWF nights? Do they plan to turn part of the site into an all-weather ATV track? Will they rent this place out to kindergarten class reunions? Or will this be a practice range for politicians who want to learn how to sling mud? There’s just no telling. The secretive owners still have not divulged their marketing plans with the local residents.
Pictures Taken After 2″ Rain
Regardless, they have conspired with Mother Nature to create a world-class mud bath, as the pictures below show. I took the pictures below the morning after the gage at the West Fork and 59 recorded a two-inch rain.
Looking north toward entrance on right.The ponds above the detention pond.Let’s bring in some more mud. Note dirt piles at top of frame.ATV terrain, northern part of site.There’s nothing like mud to slow down work on a construction site. That’s why this must be intentional. Ooops. What happened to those silt fences on the west?The creative approach to construction.Even though they’ve installed a drain, they still haven’t installed pumps.
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.
After at least three days of warnings, dozens of tornados swept through Texas last night, injuring approximately 30 people and leaving tens of thousands without power. Luckily for the Lake Houston Area, however, we dodged the worst of the storms.
Spectacular Light and Sound Show in Lake Houston Area
Line after line of thunderstorms swept north through Texas last night and this morning as the front pushed toward the east. Below is a radar image of the one that raked over Kingwood shortly before 7 AM this morning. The light show was spectacular. Thunder seemed to merge into one long, half-hour crescendo. Before the boom from one lightning strike could fade, another would hit. The sky sounded like the William Tell Overture. The lightning, thunder and incessant wailing of the alerts from my weather radio left me breathless and sleepless.
RadarScope Pro Image at 6:48 AM on 3/22/22.Note the 11 “Watch” and “Warning” alerts in the upper right corner!
When the sky cleared, I ventured out to survey the damage, but saw little. The storm blew through so quickly that far less rain fell than predicted. Forecasters had talked about stalled supercells dropping up to 7″ as we saw in January. Those never materialized, at least not in the Lake Houston Area.
Official Rainfall Totals Fall Short of Predictions
The highest rainfall total at an official gage was 2.44 inches at the West Lake Houston Parkway bridge. Two gages north of Lake Conroe reported more than 3 inches. Most other gages recorded between 1 and 2 inches, far less than the widespread 2″-4″ predicted with isolated totals exceeding 7″.
24 hour rainfall totals from the storm on 3/21 – 3/22/22.Most of the rain fell within an hour.
By 8:30 AM, Harris County Meteorologist Jeff Lindner reported that the squall line was moving off to the east.
“Rainfall amounts of 1.0-2.0 inches in 15-30 minutes with this line quickly led to street flooding,” said Lindner. Most storm sewers can handle only 1.0-2.0 inches per hour.
All Channels and Streams within Banks
At 3 PM, the Harris County Flood Warning System shows that all creeks and bayous are within their banks. Lindner expects no flooding, but cautions that we need to watch the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto as runoff works its way south from harder hit areas to the north.
Harris County Flood Warning System Channel Status as of 3PM Tuesday afternoon.
Photos of Kingwood-Area Streams
Photos of local channels confirmed the Kingwood Diversion Ditch, Ben’s Branch and Taylor Gully were up, but not out of their banks.
Taylor Gully at top of frame where it leaves Woodridge Village detention ponds (foreground) north of Elm Grove.Looking south at the Kingwood Diversion Ditch where it takes water out of Ben’s Branch just south of St. Martha Church.North Park Drive cuts through the frame from left to right.Looking south at bens Branch where it crosses under Kingwood Drive.
2-Year Rain
Comparing the rainfall amounts to an Atlas-14 chart of annual exceedance probabilities shows that a 2.5 inch rain, in about an hour, qualifies as a 2-year storm.
atlas 14 rainfall probabilities
It made a pretty rude wake up call on Mother Nature’s part.
Experts Still Assessing Tornado Damage
Several National Weather Service assessment teams will fan out across the region today, surveying the damage from multiple tornados.
According to NBC, “Nocturnal tornadoes are two and a half times more deadly than their daytime counterparts largely in part to people being asleep and not having a way to get woken up by warnings.”
Lakes Near Normal
Even though Lake Houston had been lowered by a foot, it was back to within 3 inches of normal within 7 hours. The SJRA did not lower Lake Conroe before the storm. It is one half foot above its normal level as of 3:30 PM.
All things considered, we dodged the bullet with this one, especially given the buildup. Had the storm moved a little slower, had supercells parked on top of us as they did in January, had a tornado dropped out of the sky as it did elsewhere, this could have been a much different story.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/22/22
1665 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/20220322-DJI_0007.jpg?fit=1200%2C799&ssl=17991200adminadmin2022-03-22 16:16:082022-03-22 16:16:11Whew! Dodged the Worst.
Models point to the area from US59 to about 40 miles northwest of Lake Houston as the area of greatest risk for heavy rainfall.
Isolated areas could reach higher than 7″ instead of up to 7″.
Watersheds on the northern and northeast sides of the county are at greatest risk for flooding according to overnight modeling of different rain scenarios by Harris County Flood Control.
Here’s where things stand as of noon on Monday, 3/21/2022.
Severe Weather Risk from Tonight into Early Tuesday.
Gulf moisture quickly returned to the region overnight. Scattered light showers are moving quickly from south to north. An upper level storm system is approaching from West Texas with strong lift ahead of it. Conditions will favor strong to severe thunderstorms in our area by mid to late afternoon over the warm air mass.
All of north Houston falls into the “enhanced risk” area for severe weather tonight. Updated at mid-day.
All of north Houston falls into the “enhanced risk” area for severe weather tonight.
The National Weather Service does not assign a mathematical probability to the definition of Enhanced Risk, but note that it is the mid-point (3) on a 5-point scale.
Tornados may form, especially in any supercells that may form in this area. The Brazos Valley area will see the highest tornado threat, according to Lindner. But the National Weather Service Storm Prediction Center extends the area of 10% risk to the entire north and northeast Houston area. Large hail and damaging winds will also be possible with these storms.
The NWS Storm Prediction Center (SPC) gives a large part of Texas a 10% chance for tornadoes tonight.An even higher risk area is NW of Houston.
The SPC also gives a 30% chance of large hail and damaging winds to west, north and northeast Houston.
The worst large-hail probabilities are west of us, but our area still has a 30% probability.
Severe Threat Gives Way to Heavy Rainfall Threat During Night
According to Lindner, the severe threat will gradually transition to a heavy rainfall threat during the night as the pre-frontal trough slows over the Houston area. Formation of a line or two of training thunderstorms will be possible. Models point toward the US 59 corridor northeast of Houston and about 40 miles to the northwest as the most likely area of cell training.
The red area indicates a 40% chance of excessive rainfall.It includes areas from the northwest side of Houston east to roughly US59 and the Lake Houston Area.Updated 7:30am.
Lindner predicts rainfall amounts of 2-4 inches north of I-10 with isolated totals upwards of 6-7 inches. South of I-10, amounts of 1-2 inches look most likely. Given moisture levels, hourly rainfall rates of 2-3 inches per hour will be possible. Street flooding in urban areas is currently the greatest threat and the Tuesday morning commute may be impacted.
Runoff, River and Stream Report
While grounds are generally dry over the area, expected rainfall rates in short duration will generate rapid run-off. Rises on all creeks and bayous are expected tonight.
HCFCD modeled various contingency forecasts yesterday afternoon with different rainfall durations and amounts to see how area bayous and creeks would respond.
Most of the creeks and bayous will be able to handle 4-5 inches of rainfall in a 4-6 hour period or longer. Should parts of the area realize the higher isolated totals of 6-7 inches, there would likely be some concerns for channels reaching bankfull.
While uncertainty still exists on exactly where training lines will form, Lindner believes watersheds on the northern and northeastern sides of Harris County will be at greatest risk. He named:
Cedar Bayou
Luce Bayou
East and West Forks of the San Jacinto River
Cypress Creek
Spring Creek
Greens Bayou
Halls Bayou
Little Cypress Creek
Willow Creek
These watersheds will likely see some of the higher rainfall amounts and responses.
To view real-time stream levels and inundation reports, visit the Harris County Flood Warning System and click on a gage near you. Stay home tonight. Don’t roam. Let your fingers do the slogging.
