Last Chance to Support Petition Limiting Subsidence

TownshipFuture in the Woodlands is presenting a petition to Groundwater Management Area 14 (GMA-14) that would limit proposed increases in groundwater pumping that could lead to subsidence.

Last night, TownshipFuture held a panel discussion with representatives from San Jacinto River Authority, Woodlands Water Agency and Harris-Galveston Subsidence District. They all confirmed that lower aquifer levels, caused by over-use of groundwater pumping, leads to subsidence.

You need not live in the Woodlands to sign this petition. Excessive groundwater pumping will affect much of Montgomery and Harris Counties. See the maps modeling subsidence below. Note the 3.75 feet in southern MoCo and 3 feet in northern Harris.

Subsidence if 115,000 acre feet per year are pumped in Montgomery County, depleting aquifers by 30% (leaving 70%).
Subsidence in Harris County if private utilities are allowed to deplete aquifers in MoCo by 30%, leaving 70%.

Note how projected subsidence is 1 foot at the Lake Houston Dam but 3 feet in Huffman and Kingwood. This would tilt Lake Houston back toward the north by 2 feet.

YOUR ACTION NEEDED NOW

Please sign TownshipFuture’s petition to GMA 14 opposing increased groundwater pumping!  You can find it at:

https://townshipfuture.org/home/our-advocacy/petition-to-limit-groundwater-pumping-in-montgomery-county/

The petition will be sent to GMA 14 AT 5PM TODAY and having your name included will go a long way to help persuade GMA 14 to minimize groundwater pumping. As of 2PM, over 200 people have added their names to the petition. Talk to your neighbors who might be interested in adding their names.

This is something that needs to come from our whole community, because it impacts ALL of us! Act NOW! Please share with all of your friends, neighbors and relatives.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/7/2021 at 3:45 PM

1317 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.

Crucial Week for Future of Subsidence, Flooding

Three meetings will make this a crucial week for subsidence and flooding for large parts of Montgomery and Harris Counties. For months now, the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District (LSGCD) has adamantly opposed any mention of subsidence in its Desired Future Conditions (DFCs) while it argues for increased groundwater pumping. But LSGCD must get the other members of Groundwater Management Area 14 (GMA-14) to approve its DFCs before they can allow increased pumping. And opinions regarding those DFCS are far from unanimous. GMA-14 members are pushing for a metric that limits subsidence; LSGCD is fighting that.

TownshipFuture Meeting Tuesday

With that in mind, a group called TownshipFuture will host a Zoom webinar featuring experts from the San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA), the Houston-Galveston Subsidence District (HGSD), and The Woodlands Water Authority (WWA). Says Robert Leilich, president of Woodlands MUD #1 and a steering committee member of TownshipFuture, “The meeting will explore how the cost of water is related to the potential for more flooding and what you can do about it. Upcoming proposals from the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District could lead to increased subsidence, causing residents to pay more for water. These proposals could also increase the risk of physical damage to homes and the risk of flooding in flood-prone areas of The Woodlands.”

The TownshipFuture Meeting is Tuesday, April 6, at 7PM. The Zoom webinar is free and all are invited. To register, go to https://forms.gle/GYcG1Q1uekCGbrCz6. You will be sent an email with instructions how to sign into the webinar.

TownshipFuture has also launched a petition opposing the desire of the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District to increase groundwater pumping. To view the TownshipFuture petition to the GMA 14 Board of Directors, click here or go to https://townshipfuture.org/home/our-advocacy/petition-to-limit-groundwater-pumping-in-montgomery-county/.

GMA 14 has the authority to approve or disapprove any increase in LGGCD’s groundwater pumping. To support the petition, add your name at the bottom.

LSGCD Meeting Wednesday

Then, on Wednesday, April 7, at 4PM, the LSGCD will hold a special board meeting. According to the agenda, the board will go into executive session immediately after public comments to consider litigation. (However, they don’t disclose the nature of the litigation.) They will then take up two matters:

  1. Proposed Desired Future Conditions for GMA 14.
  2. Hiring a PR firm.

LSGCD staff recently finished a series of stakeholder input sessions. But the agenda does not list a report to the board on staff findings.

The hiring of a PR firm is a highly unusual move for a group of this nature. According to some observers, it indicates that LSGCD failed to convince scientists of their position on subsidence and is now taking its case to the public. One insider, though, claimed the board just feels “misunderstood.” They feel they are the victims of “misinformation.”

The LSGCD meeting will also be a Zoom webinar. To register, visit https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_cxsukkSBSg2VQE9uiUayRA. For other participation options or to make public comments during the meeting, see the instructions at the start of the agenda.

GMA-14 Meeting Friday

On Friday, April 9 at 9AM, GMA-14 will take up the matter of DFCs. It has a statutory deadline to meet to finalize DFCs: no later than January 5, 2022.

However, GMA-14 has a May 1 deadline to formulate proposed DFCs for 14 counties. So if LSGCD and the other members can’t reach a suitable compromise this week, they will need to schedule another meeting before the end of the month. And they are already pushing up against a public notice requirement for a second meeting.

Between May and January deadlines, GMA-14 must solicit public comments for 90 days on the proposed DFCs; review and publish the comments; adopt or modify the DFCs; and submit them to the TWDB. Final adoption of the DFCs requires a two-thirds vote of all the members of the groundwater management area.

At the last GMA-14 meeting, LSGCD requested more time to meet with stakeholders and its board before finalizing a DFC statement. The big questions are, “Will LSGCD request more time to finalize a proposed DFC statement for Montgomery County?” And if so, “Will it include a mention of subsidence?”

You can attend the GMA-14 meeting via the GoToMeeting App. Register here. Click here for the meeting agenda. And click here if you wish to make a public comment.

How Subsidence Relates to Flooding

USGS is a non-political, scientific agency. It states in its research that the “land subsidence in the Houston-Galveston Region … partially or completely submerges land”, “disrupts collector drains and irrigation ditches”, and “alters the flow of creeks and bayous which may increase the frequency and severity of flooding.” To read the full research on Texas Gulf Coast Groundwater and Land Subsidence, please visit: https://txpub.usgs.gov/houston_subsidence/home/

Other scientists have also documented links between subsidence, flooding, and other damages. Check out these studies.

Subsidence exposes inland areas to increased risks of flooding and erosion by altering natural and engineered drainage-ways (open channels and pipelines) that depend on gravity-driven flow of storm-runoff and sewerage. 

Expected subsidence in Harris County if GMA-14 lets Montgomery County pump 30% of its aquifers (70% remaining). The assumption going in was that this could cause up to 1 foot of subsidence, but modeling shows it creates far more.

Differential subsidence, depending on where it occurs with respect to the location of drainageways, may reduce or enhance preexisting gradients. Gradient reductions decrease the rate of drainage and thereby increase the chance of flooding by storm-water runoff. See https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/circ1182/pdf/07Houston.pdf.

Other studies show that:

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/5/2021

1315 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.

Another Above-Average Hurricane Season Predicted

This is the time of year when meteorologists start predicting how many hurricanes we will experience in the Atlantic Basin. Frank Billingsley at Click2Houston.com issued his prediction for an above-average hurricane season Friday. He also predicts that other meteorologists will predict the same. Here’s why.

Official Averages Out of Date

The official window used to calculate the average number of storms has been 1981 to 2010. But when Brian McNoldy of the University of Miami looked at the more recent 30 years from 1991 to 2020, he found an increase in the number of storms. Also, AccuWeather has already come out with its prediction, showing a substantial increase.

Year(s)StormsHurricanesMajor Hurricanes
1981-2010 (Old Average)1263
1991-2020 (New Average)1473
2020 Actual30136
2021 Predicted by AccuWeather16 to 207 to 103 to 5
Sources: Brian McNoldy, AccuWeather, NHC

Other Contributing Factors

Sea-Surface Temperatures

Sea-surface temperatures are slightly above normal for this time of year. Despite the polar outbreak in February which cooled the Gulf somewhat, the Caribbean and Atlantic remain higher than average. See anomaly map below from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center.

Seven day average as of 4/3/2021
La Niña

Billingsley’s prediction also takes into account La Niña, which is part of ENSO (El Niño Southern Oscillation).

NOAA describes El Niño and La Niña as the warm and cool phases of a recurring climate pattern across the tropical Pacific. The pattern can shift back and forth irregularly every two to seven years, and each phase triggers predictable disruptions of temperature, precipitation and winds.

The El Niño phase usually means fewer hurricanes in the Atlantic.

Typical influence of El Niño on Pacific and Atlantic seasonal hurricane activity. Map by NOAA Climate.gov, based on originals by Gerry Bell.

The La Niña phase usually means more hurricanes in The Atlantic.

Typical influence of La Niña on Pacific and Atlantic seasonal hurricane activity. Map by NOAA Climate.gov, based on originals by Gerry Bell.

Why? In short, the warm, wet air of El Niño in the tropical Pacific produces stronger vertical wind sheer which discourages hurricane formation in the Atlantic. The cool, dry air of La Niña produces less wind sheer which lets hurricanes form more easily.

National Hurricane Center

The real question is: How long will La Niña last? La Niña was strong last year. That meant one of the busiest hurricane seasons ever. (See table above.) But will it fade by the start of this hurricane season or the end? The Texas Water Development Board predicted it would begin to fade after this month. But some models show it lasting through the end of the year.

Bermuda High

AccuWeather predicts three to five hurricanes will make a direct hit on the United States this year. That’s partially due to another factor – the position of the Bermuda High. A weak Bermuda High means storms forming in the Atlantic would most likely aim at the Eastern Seaboard as opposed to coming into the Gulf.

Bottom line, “Be prepared. Anyone who has been through a hurricane can tell you it only takes one.”

Frank Billingsley, Click2Houston.com

Valuable Resources During Hurricane Season

For the full AccuWeather forecast, click here.

Colorado State University’s hurricane forecast comes out next week. It’s one of the most respected in the world.

During the season, the National Hurricane Center provides the most frequent updates of storm activities. They will start issuing tropical updates on May 15. And their reports will have more features than ever this year. See the list of new features including storm surge inundation values, weather forecasts for “blue-water” mariners, wave heights, cumulative maximum winds over 5-days, and more.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/3/2021 based on information from Click2Houston, AccuWeather, and NOAA

1313 days since Hurricane Harvey

SJRA Began Spring Seasonal Release on April 1

The San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) began slowly releasing water yesterday afternoon to lower the level of Lake Conroe to 200 feet per the temporary seasonal release policy adopted more than a year ago. When the seasonal release began, the lake stood at 201.01 feet – its normal target level. By noon today, the level stood at 200.94 feet.

Screen capture of SJRA dashboard as of 4:50PM yesterday.

Community Impact claims the release started at 4:20PM on 4/1/2020.

These pictures show the release.

Start of SJRA spring release. What 450 cubic feet per second looks like.
The slow release is designed to help protect downstream interests.
Looking back toward Lake Conroe.

Lake Lowering Policy by the Numbers

In the spring, SJRA lowers the lake one foot, starting April 1 and begins recapturing water on June 1.

In the summer and fall, it’s a little more complicated. On August 1, SJRA releases water again to reduce the lake level back to 200. Beginning Sept. 1, they take the water down another six inches. But the City of Houston may call for it to be lowered another six inches (to 199) if a named storm is predicted in the Gulf.

Statistically, the peak of hurricane season is September 10. The lake-lowering policy builds additional capacity to absorb heavy rains that could threaten the dam, and help prevent massive releases that cause downstream flooding.

Upstream/Downstream Differences of Opinion

Downstream residents love the policy. They saw their communities destroyed during Harvey when the SJRA started releasing 80,000 cubic feet per second. Many Lake Conroe residents who flooded during Harvey also love the policy.

But some Lake Conroe residents feel inconvenienced and persuaded the Lake Conroe Association to file a lawsuit requesting a temporary restraining order to stop the lake lowering. A Montgomery County judge scheduled arguments in the lawsuit for April 16th, two weeks from now.

One resident who joined the suit claims the lower lake levels forced her to repair her bulkhead at a cost of $2000. And a bait shop owner claims he was driven out of business in 2018 when people couldn’t get their boats in the water.

But pictures taken during last year’s lowering show plenty of boaters having plenty of fun despite the lower level. Evaporation often takes the lake down partway to the target level anyway. So, the SJRA may only need to release inches rather than feet to reach its target level – especially in late summer.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/2/2021

1312 days after 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.

Proposed New Law Mandates Flooding Disclosure to Renters

HB531 passed the Texas House of Representatives today. 119 voted Yea, 27 Nay and 2 voted present. Before it can become law, it still needs to pass the Senate and then the Governor must sign it.

Background and Purpose

Some feel that renters in areas susceptible to flooding may be unaware of that risk. Although state law requires a person selling real property to disclose to prospective homeowners whether the property is located in a floodplain, there is no similar requirement with respect to renters. H.B. 531 seeks to ensure that tenants are equipped with the information necessary to make informed decisions.

It requires a landlord to provide tenant with a written notice indicating whether the landlord is aware that the leased dwelling is located in a 100-year floodplain. It would also require the landlord to disclose whether the dwelling sustained flood damage in the preceding five-year period.

Some companies buy up homes on the cheap after floods and then rent them out to unsuspecting families. In North Kingwood Forest, I interviewed a family last year that fell into that category. The home flooded after May 7th in 2019, was fixed up, and quickly rented. Then the unsuspecting family promptly flooded during Imelda. Only then did the family learn of the properties history.

A first responder during Harvey leased one of these homes next to Woodridge Village in North Kingwood Forest before Imelda. Here’s what the street looked like after Imelda. The cycle continued. HB 531 is designed to help renters in situations like these.

Provisions

H.B. 531 amends the Property Code to require the landlord of a residential dwelling to provide to a tenant a written notice stating whether the landlord is or is not aware that the dwelling is located in a 100-year floodplain. The bill sets out additional language related to informing the tenant of the dwelling’s potential susceptibility to flooding and the advisability of flood insurance.

However, if the landlord of a dwelling in a 100-year floodplain has raised the building above the 100-year floodplain in accordance with federal regulations, the landlord is then not required to disclose that the dwelling is located in the floodplain. The bill requires a landlord who knows that flooding has damaged any portion of a dwelling at least once during the five-year period immediately preceding the effective date of a lease to provide written notice to the tenant.

An amendment to H.B. 531 requires each applicable flood notice to be included in a separate written document given to a tenant before execution of a lease.

Lease Termination Rights

The bill lets a tenant terminate a lease if a landlord violates notice requirements and the tenant suffers a substantial loss or damage to the tenant’s personal property as a result of flooding. The tenant to give a written notice of termination to the landlord not later than the 30th day after the date the loss or damage occurred. The bill makes termination effective when the tenant surrenders possession of the dwelling.

It also requires the landlord, not later than the 30th day after the effective date of the termination, to refund to the tenant all rent or other amounts paid in advance under the lease. HB 531’s provisions do not affect a tenant’s liability for delinquent, unpaid rent or other sums owed to the landlord before the date the tenant terminated the lease.

If approved by the Senate and Governor, the bill would become effective on January 1, 2022.

For the full text of the bill as it currently stands, click here.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/2/2021

1312 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 560 since Imelda

Lake Conroe Association Applies for Temporary Restraining Order To Prohibit Seasonal Lowering of Lake Conroe

They’re baaaa-aaaack. Yesterday, less than a day before the SJRA spring seasonal lowering program was set to kick in, the Lake Conroe Association (LCA) applied for a temporary restraining order to prohibit it. The LCA also seeks a permanent ban on the entire program. For the complete text of their 30-page lawsuit, click here. For a summary, see below.

Seasonal Release from Lake Conroe, 529 cfs from one tainter gate open six inches.
SJRA Seasonal Release on 4/15/2020. One tainter gate open six inches releases a slow, steady stream of 529 cfs.

History of Lake Lowering Policy

After disastrous flooding during Hurricane Harvey in 2017, Governor Abbott instructed the SJRA to get into the flood mitigation business and identify strategies to reduce the risk of downstream flooding. The simplest, fastest, most effective strategy that required no grants, funding, design or construction was to lower Lake Conroe during the peaks of spring and fall flood seasons. This created an extra buffer against downstream flooding by creating extra capacity in the upstream lake.

The seasonal-lowering policy started in 2018 and continued in 2019. By late 2019 when the SJRA was getting ready to review the policy for another year, the Lake Conroe Association mobilized opposition in a major-league way. People came to SJRA Board meetings in busloads. There were so many that they couldn’t all get in the SJRA boardroom to be heard. So the next meeting was held in the Conroe Convention Center. Close to a thousand “Stop the Drop” protesters showed up. They argued that lowering the lake a foot was destroying businesses around the lake, undermining property values, destroying the local school system, and threatening the entire tax base of Montgomery County.

They also argued that Lake Conroe was never intended to be a flood control reservoir, and that the policy wasted water, produced no benefit, and had minimal effect. The current lawsuit makes many of these same hyperbolic arguments.

Allegations in Lawsuit

Below, see the major allegations in the seasonal-lowering lawsuit (italics) and my responses (normal text).

The SJRA and City of Houston are unlawfully discharging billions of gallons of water from Lake Conroe which causes it to remain below full capacity. However, a quick check tonight showed that the lake was actually above its normal capacity.

The Lake Conroe Dam is being operated contrary to state law. The operation was initiated at the request of the governor and approved by the TCEQ as an emergency measure while permanent downstream flood mitigation efforts could be put in place.

Lake Conroe Dam operation is contrary to the interests of the parties “for whom the lake is maintained, regulated and conserved.” The City of Houston paid for the construction of the dam and owns two thirds of the water in the lake. The operation benefits Houston residents and was requested by the Mayor of Houston. So I ask, “For whom is the lake maintained, regulated and conserved?”

The State is entitled to regulate water to protect its citizens’ health and safety. Isn’t that what the lake-lowering policy ensures?

Lake Conroe is not a flood control reservoir. Right! We’re trying to do the best with what we have.

The policy doesn’t conserve water. Right again! But it does conserve downstream property and lives. Somehow those got lost in the LCA arguments. For a list of Lake Houston Area damages during Harvey, click here.

Flood control is not permitted for Lake Conroe. But the TCEQ did permit it. And the TCEQ rejected an LCA appeal last year.

There’s no evidence that the policy works. Tell that to the people who didn’t flood in this storm.

The policy is not really temporary. Why was the policy enacted for three years then? It’s intended to allow safe completion of additional gates on the Lake Houston Dam.

The seasonal releases happen far in advance of a storm. Lake Conroe’s gates can release water 15 times faster. If a major storm approaches and a large release becomes necessary, it could overwhelm the gates on Lake Houston. The slow seasonal release safely reduces that risk.

Harris County Flood Control’s Harvey Report found the benefits of lowering Lake Conroe to be “negligible.” That’s a lie. The word negligible never appears in the report. And the lawsuit distorts the figures. It claims the Lake Conroe release accounted for at most 16% of the water going over the Lake Houston Dam. But it was one third of all the water coming down the West Fork where the vast majority of the damage occurred. The lawsuit allegation includes East Fork water to exaggerate its claim. The Lake Conroe Dam has no effect on East Fork flow. Also consider this. All by itself the Lake Conroe release during Harvey would have ranked as the ninth largest flood in West Fork history. Hardly negligible!

Petitioners continue to be affected in their rights to their use and enjoyment of Lake Conroe. Now we’re getting to the heart of the matter. But these photos show little impact on recreation even when the lake was lowered two feet.

Water released as part of a seasonal lowering will never be available for use. Rain replenishes the lake at no cost.

As of 8pm on 3/31/2021, Lake Conroe was at its normal “target level.” The SJRA lake lowering policy calls for lowering it one foot during April and May.

Without the TRO, Lake Conroe residents will have no adequate remedy to protect the “public’s interest.” Which public? The owners of the water? Or residents of Lake Conroe?

Lake Conroe Residents Don’t All Agree with LCA

Not all Lake Conroe residents agree with this petition. Though the petition gives no hint of that. Many who flooded during Harvey have previously testified that they want the lake lowered – permanently!

Exaggeration Upon Exaggeration

This lawsuit exaggerates. And that’s its biggest flaw. It sounds like the kid who tells the teacher “My dog ate my homework, right before a bus ran him over, and a 747 crashed into the bus. I tried to retrieve my homework, but the fire department washed it down the sewer. And now it’s floating in Lake Conroe where water skiers are tripping on it. That’s going to destroy home values on Lake Conroe and undermine the tax base of the school district. So you see, Teach, we have much bigger things to worry about. Like your salary and job security.”

For more about the seasonal lake lowering policy, click on this page.

Hearing Scheduled

It’s not clear yet how this lawsuit will affect the spring lowering of Lake Conroe scheduled to start Thursday. The lawsuit is scheduled for a hearing on 4/19/2021 in Montgomery County.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/1/2021

1311 Days after 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.

HCFCD Issues Flood Bond Update as of March 30, 2021

In the March 30, 2021 Harris County Commissioner’s Court Meeting, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) gave a Flood Bond update. Here’s where projects in the 2018 Flood Bond program stand.

Overview

In the 30 months since the bond was approved by Harris County voters, the Harris County Flood Control District has used bond funds to:

  • Accept 25 grants totaling approximately $960 million with Bond funds providing around $259 million in local matching funds
  • Execute 326 engineering agreements totaling $241 million
  • Award 39 construction agreements totaling $296 million
  • Procure 19 staff augmentation agreements providing 113 contract staff members
  • Acquire nearly 340 properties at a value over $208 million for construction projects, floodplain preservation, and wetland mitigation banks
  • Make $115 million available to the Office of the County Engineer to manage and construct drainage improvements in nearly 100 subdivisions across Harris County
  • Conduct 140 community engagement meetings with over 11,413 attendees
  • Complete nearly 630 home buyouts at a value over $130 million with over 680 additional in process for a buyout (since Hurricane Harvey)
  • Complete over $125 million repair program to address damages to District infrastructure caused by Hurricane Harvey

19 Projects Completed, 372 Underway

The flood bond update shows that of the 19 projects completed so far, investigations, analyses and studies comprised 15.

Altogether there are 372 individual HCFCD projects in progress related to the Bond Program. The table below shows the stages of those projects.

88% of all projects identified in the flood bond are currently underway and at some state of completion.

Only 21 Projects Not Yet Started

Only 21 Bond projects have not yet started. They are all in the fourth quartile of the bond prioritization framework and will begin between July 2021 and March 2022. Of those, two are in the San Jacinto watershed: CI-61 (East Fork, West Fork, and Lake Houston Dredging) and F-15 (General Drainage Improvements near Atascocita).

Dredging included a $10 million match with estimated partner funds of $40 million.

FEMA/Army Corps, TWDB and City of Houston funds have covered dredging in the river to date.

Status of Lake Houston Area Projects

Other projects in the Lake Houston Area at least partially underway.

Luce Bayou and Huffman

Project underway include right-of-way acquisition, design and construction of general drainage improvements in the Luce Bayou Watershed and near Huffman (total $20 million). Luce Bayou right-of-way acquisition and floodplain preservation ($10 million) has also started.

Gates on Lake Houston Dam

Design and construction of additional gates on Lake Houston ($20 million) is nearing completion of the design phase. The City of Houston has taken the lead on that project but has made no announcements on it recently.

Other Projects Lake Houston Area Partially Underway
  • The San Jacinto Watershed Study ($625,000)
  • Funding for future partnership projects based on the SJR watershed study ($18.75 million)
  • Investigation of potential detention sites around the Glendale Dredge site in Partnership with the City of Houston ($50,000)
  • Conveyance improvements along Panther Creek ($10 million)
  • General drainage improvements east of Lake Houston ($10 million)
  • General Drainage Improvements near Kingwood ($10 million)

One Third of Projects Now Past Design Phase

One third of all projects have already begin work outside.

Ellis Not Content with 40% of Construction Going into Two Bayous in His Precinct

40% of all projects under construction are in Greens and Halls Bayou Watersheds, the two Precinct One Commissioner Rodney Ellis cares most about. He wants to slow down projects in other areas to focus more on projects in his area.

For a discussion of how the meeting went, check back tomorrow.

For the full Flood Bond update, click here. For future reference, this link is also posted on the Reports page under the Harris County Flood Control District, tab.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/30/21

1309 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Paradoxes of “Flood Control”

Most of us would hate to get flooded. Repairs can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. They can also disrupt normal life for months or even years. Yet collectively, we often act in ways that worsen flooding. Why?

From Ignorance to Inadvertence and Intentional

Some individuals do it out of ignorance, like the person who re-routes his drainage onto a neighbor’s property without thinking.

Some do it out of self-interest, like the person who re-routes his drainage onto a neighbor’s property WHILE thinking that he is saving his own.

And some do it on a mass scale for profit. These include developers who falsify engineering reports, or exploit loopholes and grandfather clauses in local regulations to save money. For instance, by avoiding the construction of detention ponds, they can squeeze more saleable lots out of a piece of land. Likewise, some bring fill into floodplains. And even try to build homes in floodways.

Putting Self-Interest Ahead of Public Interest

They all have one thing in common. They put self-interest ahead of public interest. They let society deal with the consequences of inconsiderate and sometimes illegal actions. 

When you look at such actions as conflicts between the individual and the collective, they appear rational – people just trying to maximize their profits and minimize their costs.

But when you look at it from the taxpayer perspective, through the other end of the telescope, these actions appear irrational, self-contradictory and paradoxical. Some examples:

New condos being erected by a Chinese developer near the floodway of the San Jacinto West Fork (foreground). Everything behind these condos for more than a mile and a half flooded during Harvey. The developer targets Chinese investors who likely have little means to explore the flood risk.
  1. Montgomery County gives agricultural- and timber-exemption property tax breaks to sand mines in floodways. Then they let the federal government and downstream taxpayers in Harris County and the City of Houston pay for more than a hundred million dollars in dredging.
  2. We allow the destruction of wetlands, i.e., nature’s sponges. The loss of vegetation and increase in impervious cover due to development in wetlands speeds up the concentration of floodwaters, often exacerbating downstream flooding.
  3. Land in floodplains and floodways is cheap. Allowing builders to develop there maximizes their profit, but also increases damage during floods. Then residents make flood insurance claims, seek other financial assistance, or demand expensive flood mitigation projects to protect themselves.
  4. A corollary to that: we make publicly subsidized flood insurance available in the United States. That creates a false sense of security that encourages development in dangerous places. “Even if I flood, I’m covered.” Would a private insurance company make the same offer? Hell no! They would price the policy so that people had to investigate and reconsider the risk.
  5. To build in dangerous places, people yell “property rights.” They count on the fact that most Americans are such rabid individualists that they can rally political sentiment for dubious projects with that battle cry. But when the big flood comes, they jeopardize other people’s lives by forcing first responders to make high-water rescues in swift-moving currents.
  6. Most people place unfounded faith in numbers and experts. The engineer who tells them their new home is X feet above the hundred-year flood plain may be a hired gun who does not disclose limitations on the data. For instance, in one case I saw a new mall upstream changed the base flood elevation of a residence by 12 FEET! Who was that engineer working for? Was the City or County engineer really checking his work?
  7. Most people are not knowledgeable enough to interpret risk from flood maps. They think they’re in or out of the risky areas based on government flood maps. But they may not know that their local government has not updated the data on which those maps are built for decades. During that time, intensive upstream development may have occurred.
  8. Brown & Root warned of the need for maintenance dredging at certain places on the West Fork San Jacinto almost two decades before the need became APPARENT. But it was easy to defer maintenance on problems lurking underwater. And the City did. That contributed to the flooding of almost 20,000 homes and businesses in the Lake Houston area during Harvey.
  9. We acknowledge that flooding does not respect political boundaries. But flood regulations remain, in many cases, out of sync across those boundaries. The balkanization of local politics makes flood mitigation difficult. Careless development upstream can quickly offset the expenditure of hundreds of millions spent on flood mitigation projects downstream. That results in no net gain and can even make flooding worse.
  10. Failure to predict (or account for) upstream development can erode the margin of error that protects downstream residents from flooding.
  11. Most Americans dream of owning their own little plot of land. So, we continue to grow outward, not upward. This creates the need for more concrete and other impervious cover. More floodplains get filled. More wetlands get destroyed. More roads get paved. More aggregate gets extracted from floodways and floodplains. And the cycle continues relentlessly.
  12. Some counties deliberately design lax floodplain regulations or ignore them to lure developers. The East Montgomery County Improvement District used to trumpet, “Come here. We have no rules.” Then the developers build questionable developments in questionable places and target first-time home buyers who are too naïve to understand the risks.
  13. Montgomery County also hired an engineering firm to check the engineering firm’s own plans for a developer. As many as 600 homes across the county line in Kingwood flooded when the company didn’t highlight its own “errors.” For instance, they said there were no floodplains or wetlands when there were. If these guys were financial auditors, they would be disbarred by now. Talk about conflicts! But in the topsy-turvy world of engineering, that can make them more attractive to potential developer clients.
  14. One developer in Liberty County has forever altered the floodplains of the East Fork and Luce Bayou across an area that’s already 15,000 acres and growing. Liberty County commissioners refused to look at video evidence that the developer was not following county regulations. Then, in the same meeting, they complained about people making allegations without any evidence. Blindness is willful when tax dollars are at stake.
  15. Population can simply outgrow drainage infrastructure as it has in large parts of Houston. So, in 2010, Houstonians passed a drainage fee based on a property’s percentage of impervious cover. Then City officials promptly started diverting money from the fund. Voters passed another charter amendment in 2018 to create a lock box around the money. But the language did not do that. And guess what? A lack of ballot and budget transparency keeps us locked in cycles of despair and repair.
  16. Major floods happen infrequently enough that officials, engineers and developers can blame them on “acts of God.” In reality, floods result not only from what falls from the sky, but also from thousands of individual decisions leading up to the flood. Developers who built in the wrong place. People who bought in the wrong place. Based on information some experts knew was outdated. Without taking proper precautions. See above.
  17. Flood mitigation and disaster relief processes take too long. They need re-engineering to shorten the time between problem and solution. We are still accepting applications for Harvey aid. And most of the flood mitigation projects completed to date that arose from Harvey have been studies that are a preludeto construction. The lengthy time between problem and solution keeps people at risk for flooding. 

Bizarre Paradoxes

After studying and writing about flooding for more than three years, here are my nominations for the 17 most bizarre things we tolerate as a society re: flooding.

Self-Inflicted Flooding

I could go on. But you get the idea. Much flooding is self-inflicted by the human race.

I received a flood insurance mailing today from USAA. They pointed out how much even a small amount of water can set you back financially. “Just 1 inch of flood damage can cost you more than $25,000,” the company claims. “Why risk it?”

USAA also points out that:

  • Floods are the #1 natural disaster in the U.S.
  • Flood insurance isn’t part of your typical homeowner’s coverage.
  • More than 20% of flood losses each year occur in low- or medium-risk areas.

That last point really stopped me.

That means 80% of flood-insurance claims come from areas already known as high-risk. And why the National Flood Insurance Program is more than $20 billion in the hole.

We need to have a serious discussion about these paradoxes. Clearly, we’re doing many things wrong.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/29/2021

1308 Days after 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.

Support Creation of Dredging District to Reduce Floods, Improve Lake Capacity

In the 2021 Legislation session, State Rep. Dan Huberty introduced HB2525, a bill to create a Dredging and Maintenance District for Lake Houston. Senator Brandon Creighton introduced an identical companion bill in the senate, SB1892. It deserves the support of everyone in the Houston region who depends on the lake for water as well as those whose homes and businesses flooded during Harvey.

Why We Need Perpetual Maintenance Dredging

For those who may not remember, during Harvey enough sand and silt came down the San Jacinto West Fork to block the river by 90% according to the US Army Corps of Engineers.

South of the Kingwood Country Club’s Island Course, Hurricane Harvey deposited several feet of sand that reduced the carrying capacity of the West Fork by 90%, according to the Army Corps.

Massive sediment and tree deposits dammed the river at the Union Pacific Railroad Bridge, south of the Kingwood County Club, West Lake Houston Parkway and Kings Point. The blockages contributed to the flooding of 16,000 homes and 3,300 businesses.

Union Pacific Railroad Bridge over West Fork after Harvey had turned into a “beaver dam” because of deadfall washed downstream and caught in the supports.
After Harvey, sand deposits at the West Lake Houston Parkway bridge reached the tree tops.
West Fork Mouth Bar immediately after Harvey virtually blocked the river between Kings Point and Atascocita Point (top right).

Two years later, Tropical Storm Imelda made similar deposits on the East Fork where thousands of additional homes flooded.

Wherever moving bodies of water meet standing bodies, the current decelerates and sediment tends to drop out of suspension. You can see the same phenomenon where smaller streams and channels enter the lake.

Brown & Root Report, 2000
Rogers Gully mouth bar in Atascocita

History of Disputes with FEMA, Corps Over Deferred Maintenance

After Harvey, leaders in the Humble/Kingwood Area fought with the Corps to remove the biggest of the blockages – the West Fork Mouth Bar. The Corps fought back.

The Corps and FEMA believed the massive mouth bar had been growing for years and that it resulted from deferred maintenance.

There was some truth to that. That reach of the West Fork had never been dredged at least in the previous 40 years. The ensuing debate lasted more than a year.

That’s why, shortly after the Corps started its Emergency Dredging program in 2018, it emphasized the need for maintenance dredging to a) avoid such disputes and b) keep problems at a subacute level.

Two Years Later, FEMA/Corps Agreed to Partial Mouth Bar Dredging

Then, in 2019, the City of Houston commissioned Tetra Tech to harvest core samples from the bar. The samples showed that most sand and silt was recently deposited. FEMA later relented and agreed to have the Corps dredge 500,000 cubic yards from a six hundred acre area south of the mouth bar. The Corps finished that dredging in late 2019. The City continued the program with mechanical dredges in January of 2020. They’re still at it. And people are still at risk from the next big flood.

Lake Houston Has Lost 22,000 Acre Feet of Capacity

Meanwhile, Lake Houston, which supplies water to millions of people has been steadily losing capacity. In 2018, the Texas Water Development Board found the lake had lost more than 22,000 acre feet of capacity. The problems are most apparent around the edges of the lake and in its upstream reaches. Both natural streams and man-made channels have become silted in. Mouth bars on both the East and West Forks have reduced the depth of the San Jacinto to approximately 3 feet (from 25 to 30 feet), except where it has already been dredged.

Atascocita resident walking across the river in 2019 without getting his shirt wet.

This cannot continue indefinitely. Nor can we expect the federal government to pay for deferred maintenance in the future; we have been warned. If we expect help again in the future after disasters, we must be able to show what bottom depths were before the storms. And those kinds of surveys are regular parts of maintenance dredging programs.

Safety and Future at Stake

In the three and a half years since Harvey, according to boaters and residents, we have not yet been able to restore the area between Kings Point and Atascocita Point to its pre-storm depth. We haven’t even removed all of the mouth bar.

Three mechanical dredges are still trying to reduce the West Fork Mouth bar more than 15 months after they started. Photo taken 3/19/21.

We need to figure how much sediment comes downriver every year and remove at least that much with a maintenance dredging program to:

  • Stop or reduce the loss of reservoir capacity
  • Reduce the risk of flooding
  • Show good faith to FEMA, eliminate contentious arguments with regular river bottom surveys, and demonstrate how much build-up resulted from a particular disaster.

We also need to be able to quickly accelerate the program after major storms such as Harvey and Imelda.

Dredging needs to be a continuous activity because one major flood can deposit more sediment than humans can remove in years.

How You Can Help

I urge you to support HB2525. Write as many local leaders on the City, County and State levels as possible. Pay particular attention to the House Natural Resources Committee where the bill is pending hearings right now. State Senator Brandon Creighton has filed an identical companion bill, SB1892, which has been referred to the Local Government Committee.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/28/2021

1307 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Winter Storm’s Death Toll Rises Sharply Higher than Harvey’s

Shortly after the winter storm in February that caused statewide power outages, officials estimated the death toll near 60. In the last month, that figure has risen to 111 – nearly double the previous estimate and 43 higher than Hurricane Harvey which killed 68.

The February 2021 Winter Storm claimed 43 more lives in Texas than Hurricane Harvey.

Not Just Hypothermia

The New York Times reported Representative Joaquin Castro, an Austin Democrat, as saying, “It’s worse than anyone could have imagined.

“Douglas Loveday, a spokesman with the state health department, said that it had taken investigators weeks to link the additional deaths to the cold weather and the accompanying storm,” said the Times.

State officials said that while most winter storm victims died from hypothermia, other died from:

  • Vehicle accidents
  • Medical equipment failures
  • Chronic illnesses that were suddenly worsened
  • Lack of home oxygen
  • Falls
  • Carbon monoxide poisoning
  • Fire.

Search for Solutions

As the death toll has climbed from the winter storm, the search for causes of the grid failure continues. The Times article continued, “The storm disrupted the power infrastructure, which, officials said, was unprepared for such intense winter conditions.”

The big questions:

  • “Why were we unprepared?”
  • “Who’s at fault?”
  • “How can we prevent a recurrence?”

Officials have called for an overhaul of the state’s power system. But aside from some symbolic firings of ERCOT board members, no one to date has made hard decisions about becoming part of a larger grid or winterizing equipment that failed. Some may be difficult to winterize given current technology.

Texas Power Sources

According to ERCOT, Texas gets its power from five sources: solar (2%), nuclear (11%), coal (18%), wind (23%), and natural gas (46%).

Percent of Texas Power supplied by Solar, Nuclear, Coal, Wind and Natural Gas. Source: ERCOT.

Ice, for instance, can form on wind turbine blades, severely impairing efficiency. This article in ScienceDirect describes the problem. “Ice accretion on the blades of a wind turbine can lead to turbine shutdown, power loss and damage to turbine components. To prevent ice formation on wind turbine blades, an ice sensor integrated with an ice mitigation system is required. The ice sensor can be used with a de-icer on the blade surface. However, the current ice sensing and de-icing technologies are inefficient and integrated systems need appreciable improvement.”

It ain’t easy being green.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/26/2021

1305 Days after Hurricane Harvey