Development Watchlist: Perry, Romerica, Colony Ridge and More

Here’s an update to last week’s watchlist. It includes seven Lake Houston Area developments – four from last week and three new.

Perry Homes’ Woodridge Village

On April 28, 2020, Harris County Commissioners approved the purchase of Woodridge Village from Perry Homes with two conditions: 1) that the City of Houston would defray half the cost by contributing $7mm worth of land that HCFCD needed for other flood control costs, 2) that the City would adopt new Atlas-14 rainfall statistics.

The next day, Houston Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin discussed the deal on a Facebook live “virtual lunch” with the Lake Houston Area Chamber. At about 26:20 into the video, he said that the stipulations had already been agreed to. He said the City had already identified 11 pieces of property, 6 of which were presented to the County during its consideration of the deal in executive session the previous night. He also said the City would divert water from Taylor Gully to the Kingwood Diversion Ditch and build a barrier between Elm Grove and Woodridge, while the county built a regional detention facility.

Perry contractors went back to work the next day before Martin spoke. They continued working all week. They worked near Mace in Porter, on N2 (the large detention pond in the middle of the western border), and N3 (another detention pond on the eastern border).

A reliable source who needs to remain anonymous told me that the work was at the request of Perry’s lawyers. The source said that Perry and its contractors were simply complying with their contract.

This week marks the anniversary of the first storm (May 7th) that landed Perry in hot water. And forecasters predict an above-average hurricane season, which starts in four weeks. The lawyers may have had that on their minds, too. As they say in legal circles, “The third time is the pen.” Woodridge contributed to flooding Elm Grove twice last year, in May and September.

Excavator working near Mace in Porter on April 29, 2020.

Romerica’s “Orchard Seeded Ranches”

This is the 331-acre project formerly known as the Heron’s Kingwood. It wound around the Barrington and River Grove Park. Romerica is now trying to develop the same land under a different name, “Orchard Seeded Ranches.”

However, on Thursday, 4/30/2020, the Houston Planning Commission deferred approval of the developer’s General Plan.

plat of orchard seeded ranches
General Plan of Orchard Seeded Ranches in Kingwood Texas

The Commission then asked the developer to consult with the City Engineer; the Planning and Development Department; and Harris County Flood Control before bringing further requests back to the Commission.

That should send a strong signal to the developer that rough waters lie ahead. Any proposal will likely be debated publicly when/if the developer returns.

The development is still listed in CoH’s PlatTracker. So we will continue to watch this one.

Holley’s Kingwood Cove Golf Course Redevelopment

A review of the City of Houston’s PlatTracker Plus Map indicates that Holley has not yet applied for any permits on the golf course in Forest Cove. City of Houston confirmed that via a FOIA request (Freedom of Information Act).

Note how golf course on left is unshaded. That indicates no activity with the Planning Commission. Compare that to the purple area on the right for Romerica’s property. That indicates approval of a General Plan is still pending.

A review of the Harris County Appraisal District website indicates a limited liability company in Pittsburgh, PA, actually owns the golf course.

Harris County Appraisal District info for property at 805 Hamblen, aka Kingwood Cove Golf Course.

It’s not unusual for developers to use other people’s money. I shall continue to watch this. Holley says his engineer is reworking plans based on input from people surrounding the course.

Ryko Property Near Confluence of Spring Creek and West Fork

This property is in Montgomery County and the City of Houston’s Extra Territorial Jurisdiction. The Montgomery County Engineers office says the company has not yet filed any plans that have been approved. The City of Houston PlatTracker Plus Map also shows the owner has not yet filed any applications.

US FWS Wetlands Map shows wetlands throughout the Ryko property between Spring Creek and the West Fork.

New Caney ISD High School #3

Dark green area in center between Sorters Rd. and 59 is future home of New Caney ISD High School #3.

The New Caney Independed School District plans to build a third high school south of the HCA Kingwood Medical Center and behind the car dealerships that front US59. I don’t know much more about this except that they plan to extend roads into the area that is now forest. High schools usually have large parking lots. And that means rapid drainage. It is unclear at this time whether MoCo will require detention ponds.

Northpark Woods

Looking northwest at Northpark Woods from over Sorters/McClellan Road. The drainage ditch on the left parallels Northpark Drive. Sand mines and the West Fork are in the background. Photo 4/21/2020.

This high-density development along the West Fork San Jacinto River in Montgomery County is now about one-third to one-half built. Construction continues.

The Colonies in Plum Grove

North of SH99 in Plum Grove and east of the East Fork in Liberty County, lies one of the largest developments in the Houston region without detention ponds.

In January of 2017, the Houston Chronicle wrote about how La Colonia was transforming Plum Grove. They interviewed local residents who lamented the loss of forests. ABC13 ran a story about the squalid living conditions. Yet the area continues to expand.

Formally known as Colony Ridge, some locals call it “The Colonies.” Colony Ridge bills itself as a “master-planned” community with six major subdivisions: Sante Fe, Camino Real, Grand San Jacinto, Rancho San Vincente, Montebello, and Bella Vista. Together they comprise 30,478 lots on approximately 10,000 acres at present. And they’re still growing!

The Colonies currently cover an area almost as large as Kingwood. Photo 4/21/2020.
Drainage empties into the East Fork San Jacinto. While flying over the area, I did not see one detention pond.
 Mobil homes make up most of the housing stock. Note open-ditch drainage.

Colony Ridge advertises itself as “an escape from the city, land on which to grow and build a home, no restrictions and easy credit.” Aerial photos reveal people scratching out hardscrabble lives on barren lots.

This is a blue collar neighborhood. The developer says his target market is poor Latino laborers. They see this as a step up from apartment living and a chance to own a part of the American dream.

But while flying over it, I did not see one detention pond.

As SH99, the Grand Parkway, pushes east from 59, this area will boom. Without better drainage regulations, Liberty County and Plum Grove will heap their drainage problems on those downstream.

FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer shows East Fork Flood Plains relative to Colony Ridge (right).

The good news is that Liberty County has joined with seven other counties to form a Southeast Texas Drainage District. The bad news is that Harris County is not one of the seven.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/3/2020

978 Days after Hurricane Harvey

FEMA Reforming Flood Insurance Risk, Rate Structure

Since the National Flood Insurance Plan’s (NFIP) inception in 1968, additional legislation has been enacted to strengthen the program, ensure its fiscal soundness, create better maps, and tie rates closer to risk. Next year, FEMA will transform the NFIP with something called Risk Rating 2.0, a major change.

FEMA says that with Risk Rating 2.0, NFIP is leveraging industry best practices and current technology to deliver rates that are fairer, easier to understand, and better reflect a property’s unique flood risk.

That last part is code for “we lost a lot of money.”

Unsustainable NFIP Losses

NFIP continues to pay claims in excess of revenues, and borrows increasingly from the U.S. Treasury.

Last October, Michael D. Berman wrote an article titled “Flood Risk and Structural Adaptation of markets: An Outline for Action” in the Federal Reserve Board’s Community Development Innovation Review. In it, he says, “On September 22, 2017, after borrowing $5.825 billion to fund claims from Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, the NFIP had reached its maximum U.S. Treasury borrowing authority of $30.425 billion in program debt. On October 26, 2017, Congress cancelled $16 billion of NFIP debt—the first time in the history of the NFIP that has occurred. Then on November 9, 2017, the NFIP borrowed another $6.1 billion to fund additional 2017 losses, including additional losses from Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria.”

Rating Flood Risk at Property Level

Berman claims, “The NFIP is clearly not properly pricing flood risk, nor is it adequately influencing prudent behavior by property owners and municipalities to sufficiently reduce or otherwise mitigate this risk…This new rating system, known as Risk Rating 2.0, is expected to include repricing of premiums based on flood risk at the property level.”

What Risk Rating 2.0 Involves

FEMA says its current risk-rating methodology has not fundamentally changed since the 1970s. It is now heavily dependent on the 1-percent-annual-chance-event (100-year floodplain).

Risk Rating 2.0 will incorporate a broader range of flood frequencies, new mapping data, and new technologies, more individual rating characteristics, such as: 

• Distance to the coast or another flooding source;
• Different types of flood risk; and
• The cost to rebuild a home.

By reflecting the cost to rebuild, the new rating plan will also aim to deliver fairer rates for owners of lower-value homes.

Rates that Promote Mitigation Efforts

FEMA also plans to offer mitigation credits to help incentivize risk-reduction efforts and reduce the cost of future flood events. Risk Rating 2.0 will initially provide credits for three mitigation actions:

  • Installing flood openings; 
  • Elevating onto posts, piles, and piers; and
  • Elevating machinery and equipment above the lowest floor.

FEMA is not yet saying how many premiums will increase or decrease, or by how much. Two things ARE clear though.

6:1 Payback on Flood Mitigation Investments

First, the old system is broken and unsustainable. Flood maps were outdated and based on data decades old in many cases. They contained many unmapped areas and the mapped areas were strongly influenced by local politicians and developers. Maps also did not reflect the effects of upstream development or more intense, frequent storms.

Second, the new system has a chance to incentivize risk-reduction. The old system encouraged people and communities to rebuild things the way they were after a disaster. We need a new system that encourages more prudent behavior.

FEMA cites a recent study by the National Institute of Building Sciences. Looking back over 23 years of data, the study found that for every dollar that the federal government invests in flood hazard mitigation, taxpayers save an average of six dollars of future disaster recovery spending.

Rebuild to Fail or Rebuild to Adapt?

The current federal flood insurance program promotes rebuilding in flood prone areas. Hopefully, the new system will promote adaptation to help mitigate increased risk.

Flood insurance rates that better reflect risk may promote more prudent behavior by developers, lending institutions, property owners, buyers, and real estate agents who will all “follow the money.”

For More Information

For more information, see:

Risk Rating 2.0 FAQs

Federal Reserve Board Community Development Innovation Review

Cheaper Flood Insurance: Five Ways to Lower the Cost of Your Flood Insurance Premium

NFIP Community Rating System: A Local Official’s Guide to Saving Lives, Preventing Property Damage, and Reducing the Cost of Flood Insurance

FEMA Discussion of Property Insurance Reform

FEMA Discussion about Reducing Risks and Rates

National Institute of Building Sciences 2019 Report on Mitigation

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/2/2020

977 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Preliminary Engineering Starts for Adding More Gates to Lake Houston Dam

In early April, the Coastal Water Authority (CWA) quietly finalized the scope of work for engineers working on adding more gates to the Lake Houston Dam. Engineering firm Black & Veatch’s contract was approved. And their work has now begun. Here’s what it involves.

Looking upstream at the Lake Houston Dam. Photo taken 11/4/2019.

Background: Why More Gates?

After Hurricane Harvey, a pilot study by HCFCD and Freese & Nichols showed additional gates could have helped lower floodwaters.

The current gates on Lake Houston’s dam have one fifteenth the discharge capacity of Lake Conroe’s – 10,000 cfs vs. 150,000 cfs.

Additional gates could help synchronize the release rates of the two dams and thus reduce flood risk. More/bigger gates could lower the Lake Houston faster in advance of a storm and add width to the spillway during a storm. Both help reduce flooding.

Avoiding Unnecessary Releases

Currently, it takes several days to lower Lake Houston enough to significantly reduce flood risk. During that time, approaching storms can veer away or dissipate. So a conservation angle exists here, too. More gates release water faster. That lets CWA wait until weather-forecast certainty is higher before lowering the lake. And that, in turn, helps avoid unnecessary discharges and conserve water.

18-Month Project Starting from April 8th

The addition of gates is a three-year project broken into two 18-month phases.

Phase 1 involves preliminary design of conceptual alternatives, selecting the “best” based on criteria described below, and permitting.

The clock for Phase 1 started ticking on April 8, 2020, the day Black and Veatch’s contract was approved. Phase 1 should conclude in September 2021.

Phase 2 involves final design and construction. Assuming all goes well, we could have more discharge capacity at the Lake Houston dam by March 2023 at the earliest. However, there will be an evaluation period between the two phases that could push the completion date out further. Also…

Phase 2 Depends on Outcome of Phase 1

One objective of Phase 1 is to prove up the concept, the budget, and the benefit/cost ratio.

Proceeding to construction in Phase 2 will depend on the outcome of Phase 1. In Phase 1, engineers will examine several possible designs to determine the most effective alternative. They will consider flood reduction benefits, downstream impacts, cost, environmental impact, constructibility and more.

Then FEMA will evaluate the benefit/cost ratio of the winning design to ensure it meets or beats initial projections in the grant request.

  • If it does, FEMA will release money for Phase 2, the final design and construction.
  • If it doesn’t, the whole project could die.

FEMA does not guarantee Phase 2 funding at this time.

What Happens Now?

The scope of work document reveals who will do what in the next 18 months on the Lake Houston Spillway Improvement Project (LHSIP).

Objective: To relieve upstream flooding by increased discharge capacity that supports pre-releases.

Modifications could include (but are not limited to):

  • Additional crest gates on or adjacent to the existing dam or…
  • New, as-yet-unspecified hydraulic structures that provide for releases elsewhere on the embankment

Unlike tainter gates which swing up from a radial arm, crest gates swing down from a bottom hinge.

The project will consider both upstream benefits and downstream impacts.

Looking downstream over the Lake Houston Dam in foreground gives you some idea of the courage that it requires to live or work below a dam.

After defining alternatives and constraints, the contractor, Black & Veatch, will analyze the alternatives to quantify and compare costs and benefits of each configuration.

Five Major Tasks in Phase 1

Preliminary engineering involves five major tasks:

  • Management plans
  • Hydrology and Hydraulic Modelling
  • Permitting
  • Field Investigation
  • Development of alternative concepts

Let’s look at each.

Management Plans

Black & Veatch will begin Phase 1 by developing project-, quality-, and risk-management plans.

H&H Studies

Hydrology and hydraulics (H&H) studies will evaluate the ability of the various concepts to reduce upstream flooding and downstream impacts. Black & Veatch will develop H&H models that combine both the San Jacinto River and Buffalo Bayou basins to evaluate downstream impacts of any dam.

The combined model will extend all the way to Galveston Bay and evaluate design alternatives for up to nine events:

  • 2-, 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year storms
  • Extreme historic events (e.g. Harvey, Ike or Memorial Day), including at least one with storm-surge effects
  • A hypothetical Probable Maximum Precipitation event.

The process includes collecting, reviewing, adjusting and validating existing models before performing simulations.

Permitting Gauntlet

To save time, permitting will begin concurrently with design. The permitting schedule is aggressive and may spill over into Phase 2 as details are refined. Permitting includes (but is not limited to) coordination with federal, state and local agencies for:

  • Environmental Assessment
  • Environmental Impact Statement
  • Wetland delineations
  • Threatened and endangered (T&E) habitat assessment
  • T&E species-specific surveys
  • Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) surveys
  • Freshwater Mussel survey
  • Stormwater pollution prevention
  • Clean Water Act
  • Flood Plain Construction

The environmental team will also consider:

  • Topography and Soils Construction Impacts
  • Land Use
  • Indirect and Cumulative Impacts
  • Geology, Hydrology and Drainage
  • Sediment Quality
  • Vegetation
  • Air Quality
  • Invasive Species
  • Coastal Zone Management Wildlife and Endangered Species
  • Essential Fish Habitat
  • Existing Facilities and Utilities
  • Noise Quality
  • Socioeconomics
  • Traffic and Circulation
  • Waters of the U.S., including Wetlands
  • Environmental Justice
  • Cultural Resources (historical and archaeological)
  • Recreation
  • Floodplains
  • Visual/ Aesthetic Appeal
  • Water Quality
  • Hazardous Materials

Field Investigations

Black & Veatch will also conduct site surveys and a geotechnical investigation, complete with borings, to evaluate soil conditions, depth-to-water, permeability, and seepage control.

A bathymetry team will measure water depth and develop contour maps for an area that extends 500 feet upstream from the dam.

Preliminary Engineering/Conceptual Design

Finally, preliminary engineering will develop conceptual layouts and site plans for several alternatives.

This exercise will also evaluate areas of impact, site access and utilities, staging and borrow areas, dewatering extents, existing structure tie-in, general facilities layout, and downstream channel alignment.

These site plans will be used for costing and evaluating the feasibility for each alternative.

Criteria for Choosing Best Alternatives

The engineers will also develop an evaluation matrix that includes, but is not limited to:

  • Ability to meet project goals
  • Environmental clearance
  • Construction costs, including any environmental mitigation
  • Long-term operation and maintenance costs
  • Benefit/cost analysis
  • Risks in design, construction, and operation.

From all the feasible options, engineers will then chose the three best based on:

  • Cost
  • Upstream impact
  • Downstream impact
  • Environmental impact
  • Permitting requirements
  • Constructibility

Timing on Phase 2

Assuming we get to Phase 2, the second 18 months may not start immediately. FEMA will need time to evaluate Phase 1 results. And the CWA will need to develop bid specs, bid the job, select a winner, and develop a contract with a scope of work, just as they did for Phase 1. That could talk several months and push completion well into 2023.

For More Information

All that, just to figure out what to do! To read the full 27-page Scope of Work, click here. I will also post this document for future reference in the Reports page of this web site under a new tab titled Lake Houston Dam Spillway Improvement Project.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/1/2020

976 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Tools to Track Permit Applications for Developments Near You

Have you ever been flooded by a new development? Did you learn about the development AFTER bulldozers started knocking down trees? There’s a much better way. The City of Houston offers several tools to help you track applications for new developments long before the bulldozers start belching diesel fumes.

GIS PlatTracker Map

The first is an interactive, color coded GIS map that shows the status of all permit applications in the City and its ETJ (extra-territorial jurisdiction). The ETJ extends well beyond the boundaries of the City. Going up 45, it extends to 242. Going up 59, it extends to Roman Forest.

City of Houston PlatTracker map for Northeast Houston and Lake Houston Area as of 4/30/2020

If someone has applied for a permit to develop a piece of land, it will show up on the map. Notice the purple areas along the West Fork west of the Kingwood Country Club. That’s how I learned about the reactivation of Romerica’s plans.

The color of the parcels corresponds to the stage of the application. Clicking on the parcel pulls up an information panel that gives you more history including the date the developer submitted the application, when it will be reviewed, the review stage, and more.

Zoom in and out as wide as you want. Just be aware that the wider you zoom, the longer it takes the screen to refill with all the plat information. There’s a lot more of it!

As I zoomed out around Kingwood, the number of new developments that I was unaware of shocked me. If you want to see humongous changes, look south of Humble, east to Huffman, west to Spring, and north to Porter and New Caney. Kingwood is a relative island of quiet in a sea of change.

Other Related Interactive Maps

The PlatTracker Plat Map is just one of thirty other interactive maps that you can use to explore and monitor the City around you. They include, but are not limited to:

  • Land use
  • Water flood hazards
  • Governmental boundaries
  • Demographics
  • Annexation history
  • Address and Permit Information

PlatTracker Agenda/Spreadsheet

Once you have identified a development you are interested in, another site can help you learn more about when the Houston Planning Commission will consider applications related to the site. It will also give you:

  • Subdivision plat name
  • Application Number
  • Date Submitted
  • Subdivision type
  • Variance requests
  • Location on the Commission’s agenda
  • County
  • Council district
  • Precinct
  • Census Tract
  • Zip Code
  • School district
  • TIRZ (tax increment reinvestment zone) if any
  • Superneighborhood Council
  • Land Use
  • Number of Lots
  • Acreage
  • Appraisal district numbers
  • Developer Name
  • Applicant Company
  • Applicants Name
  • Phone Number

You can even download the latest documents related to the application.

For Planning Commission meeting dates and agendas, click here.

Situational Awareness for Concerned Citizens

Wow. Everything you need to put your mind at ease. Or stage a protest. All at your fingertips.

These are great tools for concerned residents and citizen activists.

I’m sure a lot of Elm Grove residents wish they had known about these tools before the bulldozers started knocking down trees in Woodridge Village.

For future reference, I’ve added links for these sites within ReduceFlooding’s Links Page under the Community heading.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/30/2020

975 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Houston Planning Commission defers approval of “Orchard Seeded Ranches”

In a meeting today, the Houston Planning Commission deferred automatic approval of the general plan for Orchard Seeded Ranches by taking the item off the consent agenda. The Commission then asked the developer to consult with the City Engineer; the Planning and Development Department; and Harris County Flood Control before bringing further requests back to the Commission.

Taking the item off today’s consent agenda should send a strong signal to the developer that rough waters lie ahead. Any proposal will likely be debated publicly when/if the developer returns.

History of Project

Last year, Romerica filed a permit application to build 5,000 condos and several high-rises up to 50 stories tall on 331 acres near the floodway of the San Jacinto West Fork. After a record number of people and groups filed protests with the Army Corps of Engineers, the Corps withdrew the application. But now the developer is back – with a different name – Orchard Seeded Ranches. However, Harris County Appraisal District indicates that the same people still own the land.

Location of Property

The property is identical to the property Romerica tried to develop as The Herons of Kingwood last year. The General Plan below was downloaded from the City of Houston’s PlatTracker website.

plat of orchard seeded ranches
General Plan of Orchard Seeded Ranches in Kingwood filed on 4/20/2020. For high-resolution, printable PDF, click here.

For orientation, the developed area in the middle is the Barrington. The line down the west side is Woodland Hills Drive. And the river at the bottom is the West Fork.

Filing a “general plan” like this is the first step in developing property. The developer has not yet submitted detailed plats showing construction details.

Virtually Entire Development in Floodway or Floodplain

About half of the Orchard Seeded Ranches lies in the floodway of the San Jacinto West Fork. FEMA defines floodways as the main current of a river during a flood. In the map below, that includes everything beneath the red line.

Purple area = Orchard Seeded Ranches. Red line = extent of floodway north of San Jacinto West Fork. Virtually half of subdivision would be in floodway.

Virtually all of the purple area above the red line lies in the floodplain. FEMA defines a floodplain as “storage” for water during a flood. That means water covers the land without moving rapidly.

I created the map above by combining the area to be developed with the FEMA flood map below.

From FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer. Orchard Seeded Ranches is in middle. Virtually the entire project lies in floodway (crosshatched) or 100-year floodplain (aqua).

Wetlands Issues Also Abound

Every part of the proposed development contains wetlands to some extent.

Note how the areas around the Barrington and River Grove Park are filled with wetlands (green areas). From US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Mapper.
Active bald eagle nest on Kingwood Country Club Property adjacent to Romerica's planned high rise marina.
Active bald eagle nest adjacent to development. Photo courtesy of Emily Murphy.

US Fish and Wildlife documented another eagle’s nest on the developer’s property. And the Balcom family, which lives near the western edge of the developer’s property, regularly photographs eagles from their balcony.

What’s in a Name

The name sounds as if the development would be lower density than the 50-story high-rises previously planned. But you never know. In the development business, names often have more evocative than literal significance. Look at the Houston Heights. Bridgeland (on the prairie). Mount Houston. You get the idea.

Community Considerations

Whatever the development is, when and if the developer returns to the Planning Commission, we should not forget that:

High water during Harvey at Balcom house on River Bend reached the second story.

A Less Risky, Less Costly Alternative

All of these factors will increase the risk and cost of any development.

Light pole near River Bend in North Shore as Harvey receded. Note the "wet marks" several feet up on pole. Photo by Jim Balcom.
Light pole near River Bend in North Shore as Harvey receded. Note the “wet marks” several feet up on pole. Photo by Jim Balcom.

The safest, sanest course for the developer – before putting more money at risk –would be to meet with community representatives about:

  • Purchasing this land
  • Putting a conservation easement on it
  • Letting it revert to nature and turning it into park land

Harris County Flood Control District has $175 million allocated in the flood bond for partnership projects with “Municipalities, Authorities, and Other Districts in Harris County.” See item Z100-00-00-MUNI.

That money could help purchase such property and turn it into green space forever. KSA, the Lake Houston Chamber, civic leaders and residents should get behind that idea. Judging by the response to Romerica’s last offering, it’s clear that residents would much rather see this area turned into parks than see the San Jacinto turn it into blight.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/30/2020

975 Days after Hurricane Harvey

County Approves Elm Grove Deal with Two Conditions

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo conducting virtual discussion of the purchase of Woodridge Village Property.

In another marathon session that lasted more than 12 hours Tuesday, Harris County Commissioners finally approved a deal to purchase Perry Homes/Figure Four Partners’ Woodridge Village Property for $14 million. Woodridge contributed to flooding Elm Grove Village twice last year.

Two Conditions Still on Deal

The offer will be made to Perry Homes immediately. However, it will be with the understanding that the City of Houston must:

  1. Adopt Atlas 14 rainfall standards, including within its extra territorial jurisdiction.
  2. Deed $7 million worth of other land (unrelated to this deal) to the Harris County Flood Control District to help complete other flood mitigation projects.

If the City fulfills the conditions, the Perry land would be used to create regional flood-control detention.

Commissioner Cagle Optimistic

Immediately after the meeting, Commissioner Jack Cagle spoke with City of Houston Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin who also serves as City Council Member for Elm Grove/Kingwood. According to aids, Cagle was optimistic that the City could meet the conditions.

The County treasurer doesn’t yet have permission to write a check, but this is progress.

Commissioner Cagle made the motion. Commissioner Garcia seconded. The motion carried unanimously.

Money for the purchase would come out of Flood Control District bond funds allocated for drainage improvements in the San Jacinto watershed.

Listen to the Commissioners Here

For a complete recording of the discussion and vote, click here. The “Russ” referred to in the audio is Russ Poppe, executive director of Harris County Flood Control District.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/29/2020

974 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Abandoned Texas Concrete Mine in Plum Grove Still Hasn’t Stabilized Soil or Removed Equipment

Portion of Texas Concrete Mine in Plum Grove on 4/21/2020.

Last September 24, less than a week after Imelda, the TCEQ issued a notice of enforcement to the Texas Concrete Sand Mine in Plum Grove on the East Fork of the San Jacinto. The report noted that the mine was abandoned; no activity had been observed there in the two months before Imelda. And no personnel were onsite when investigators visited the operation.

Imelda dumped 30.4 inches of rain on this exact location on 9/17/2019 and days later, investigators found four breaches leaking pit water into the East Fork.

Purpose of Soil Stabilization

Sediment and other pollution can escape through breaches in the mine’s dikes and affect water quality all the way down to Lake Houston. Stabilizing soil helps prevent erosion and water pollution, and thus reduces sediment buildups that can contribute to flooding. I discuss TCEQ standards for final soil stabilization in this post. As you can see in the photo above, this site does not have “perennial vegetative cover with a density of 70 percent (%) of the native background vegetative cover … on all unpaved areas and areas not covered by permanent structures.”

Thus it represents a high risk of pollution.

No Activity Observed for Months, Signs Removed

Josh Alberson, a Kingwood resident, traced excessive turbidity in the East Fork to the mine during the same period and visited it on several occasions. He also observed no activity then or today. Alberson took the three photos below this evening.

This post used to hold the operation’s identifying sign, according to Alberson.
These posts used to hold the safety sign for Texas Concrete. It certainly appears as though someone no longer wants to be identified with the problems remaining on this site.
Past the gate, nothing remained but broken pipe and equipment left to rust. Alberson could see no recent tire tracks in or out. The unguarded, barely fenced operation likely represents a safety hazard to area kids.

Aerial photos taken last week showed no activity at the plant and no processing equipment. However, several dump trucks, a bulldozer and a dredge remained on the property.

Comparing the images below with the Landsat photo in Google Earth dated 12/1/2019 shows that none of the equipment has moved for at least five months and most likely longer.

Pipes, an excavator and fallen light pole have blocked the entry to the plant since 12/1/2019. None of the other equipment has moved since then either.
Mine’s dredge is on dry ground and no longer operational. Comparison with 12/1/2019 Google Earth image shows that the dredge has not moved since then.

Alberson also says that the breaches he reported to the TCEQ last year still remain.

Texas Concrete Says “No Mine in Plum Grove”

The phone number for the plant’s manager (listed in the TCEQ report) has been disconnected and is no longer in service. A receptionist at Texas Concrete’s headquarters was unaware of the man listed as president of the mine in the TCEQ report. She also said “we have no mine in Plum Grove.”

TCEQ Says No Active Permits For Mine

Christian Eubanks, an investigator for the TCEQ says the plant has no active permits. He investigated the plant last year and has opened a new investigation.

Texas Concrete is a member of TACA (Texas Aggregate and Concrete Association) and lists highway materials as a major line of business. (I’ll come back to that later.)

Public Policy Implications

Google Earth shows the mine covers approximately 147 acres and borders the East Fork for more than a mile. In its current state, even more breaches could open up in the next big storm and no one would be there to fix them.

This site represents a preventable disaster in the making. But what to do?

Former Texas Concrete Plant in Plum Grove as seen in Google Earth.

Currently, Texas regulations state that a mine needs a reclamation plan to get a permit. However, there are no regulations stating they must execute the plan before abandoning the property.

The time to think about a major expense, such as reclamation, is NOT what all the profit has left a mine. That, of course, should be done upfront – before mining starts and profits roll in. Duh!

Some states force mines to post performance bonds for reclamation before issuing the initial permit to construct a mine. That makes sense. Texas should adopt that policy. This case shows why.

The Eminent Domain Option

Texas should also exercise eminent domain when miners ignore their reclamation responsibilities. These abandoned pits can represent dangers to neighborhood kids.

Pits can have steep slopes and sharp drop offs. Some, reputedly are 90 feet deep. Roads around them collapse. The sides often cave in. They can even harbor dangerous bacteria.

With money from forfeited performance bonds (if miners fail in their reclamation responsibilities), Texas could turn abandoned mines into parks for people and wildlife to enjoy. And it wouldn’t be at taxpayer expense.

Walking away from reclamation responsibilities is just another way to externalize clean up costs that some mines reportedly build into their business plans.

It’s shameful. State Rep. Dan Huberty has campaigned for more than a decade for sensible sand mine legislation. He had this to say about the Texas Concrete case. “We are working with TCEQ and will be requiring the land owner to remediate.” He added, “We will also be drafting legislation to require bonds that ensure clean up after they are done mining and hold the owners liable for non-performance.” 

When aggregate companies have outstanding issues such as the Plum Grove mine, I personally would like to see their ability to do business with TxDoT suspended. That would get compliance quickly.

Posted by Bob Rehak on April 28, 2020 with thanks to Dan Huberty, Josh Alberson and the TCEQ

753 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 222 since Imelda

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.

Carriage Hills Sand Mine Still Has Equipment in West Fork Floodway

In March, Montgomery County Commissioners voted to sue a new sand mine operating near the Carriage Hills subdivision of Conroe. The county attorney sought to force the mine to remove unspecified materials from the West Fork floodway while they resolved permit issues. Since then, according to residents, the mine has voluntarily suspended operations.

Aerial Photos/Maps Show Mine in Floodway

However, a flyover on 4/21/2020 revealed that mining, processing, and transportation equipment remains in the floodway.

New mine in San Jacinto West Fork floodway near Carriage Hills (background on left) in Conroe.
Reverse angle. Floodway cuts between homes in foreground and mine in background. River concealed by trees in background. See FEMA flood map below.
Cross-hatched area = floodway. Aqua color represents 100-year floodplain. Brown = 500-year floodplain. Source: FEMA.

From 600 Truckloads a Day to Nothing

The once bustling operation with 600 trucks per day coming and going down Carriage Hills Boulevard now seems eerily quiet. It’s not clear whether the suspension of operations relates to the County lawsuit, COVID, a drop in demand due to the economic downturn, or all of the above.

Close up shot of operations.
Residents say that before suspension of operations, the mine was running up to 600 trucks per day up Carriage Hills Blvd. leading to top of photo.
A second, smaller part of the operation.
Another sand mining operation brackets the other side of Carriage Hills.

Residents Fear Resumption of Activity

While residents enjoy the quiet, they see it as temporary. They fear that once the COVID crisis passes and the mine resolves its permit issues, the round-the-clock truck traffic will quickly return.

Indeed, the Montgomery County Engineer’s Office, indicates that the owner of the new mine has re-applied for a permit. That permit is now under review.

Even if you see zoning as a communist conspiracy, as some in Montgomery County do, being surrounded by sand mines kind of makes you a believer in large-scale, master-planned communities.

So much for those idyllic little hideaways in the woods.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/27/2020

972 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.

West Fork Mouth Bar: Going, Going…

It’s not quite gone yet. But the West Fork Mouth Bar, which forms a dam behind the dam, is getting smaller every day. Every time I fly over it, I can see how mechanical dredging has shaved more off of it . Excavators take one row after another. At this point, it appears that about half of the above-water portion of the bar has been removed.

Mouth Bar Photos from Flyover on 4/21/2020

I took this series of photos taken on 4/21/2020.

Looking northwest, towards Foster’s Mill across the slowing diminishing West Fork Mouth Bar.
Excavators load up a waiting barge.
Looking west, upstream, you can see how the excavators remove one row of sand after another.
After excavators load up pontoons, tugs shuttle them upstream to Berry Madden’s property.
Once at Berry Madden’s property (opposite River Grove Park), more workers offload the sediment and carry it out of the floodway.

Goal of Project Still Not Made Public

When contractors remove the last of the island sticking up above water, it’s not clear what the plan will be for the rest of the sand bar below water. Like icebergs, that’s where most of the mass is.

Conveyance improved somewhat last year when the Corps removed 500,000 cubic yards of sediment from the broad area between the mouth bar and Atascocita Point. This project should improve conveyance even more.

But the Corps did not dredge a channel that connected the upstream portion of the West Fork with Lake Houston. And it appears that this effort will not re-establish a channel either.

The end result will be a plateau or mesa 3-5 feet below the surface. The channel immediately upstream where the Corps finished dredging is approximately 25 feet deep. That means water coming downstream in a flood will still hit a wall.

Top Geologist’s Perspective

Tim Garfield was the top geologist for one of the world’s largest oil companies. He lives behind the mouth bar and had this to say about it.

“Although it likely represents some progress, shaving off the subaerial (above water) portion of the mouth bar seems more cosmetic than useful for flood mitigation. The reason: the Corp’s dredging two years ago trenched a channel roughly 400-500’ wide and 20-25’ deep that extends downstream of West Lake Houston bridge. It ends a few hundred  yards upstream of the Mouth Bar. This greatly increases flow conveyance in the channel. But that ends abruptly at a sand pile where water depths are less than 5’ deep,” said Garfield.

“That’s a 15’ – 20’ high, underwater sediment dam during floods,” he continued. “That will result in a significant hydraulic backwater effect causing overbank flow and upstream flooding. These points are illustrated in diagram below.”

Top and side views of West Fork show how the current will still run into an underwater dam even if the part above water is removed. Graph by Tim Garfield and RD Kissling.

Conclusion: Hydraulic Model Needed

Garfield concluded, “We really need an extension of the Corps’ dredged channel profile through the 1960 bridge opening to where Lake Houston water depth equals the channel depth of 22’-25’.  That work requires an up to date bathymetric map of the area and a hydraulic model to confirm optimal channel configuration and location.”

“That plan should be made public so that we can verify that the vast sums of public funds being spent are effectively reducing the flood risk we are still exposed to,” said Garfield.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/27/2020 with thanks to Tim Garfield and RD Kissling

972 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Commissioners Will Vote Tuesday On Measure That Could Improve Drain/Ditch Maintenance

On Tuesday, Harris County Commissioners will vote on an asset-swap proposal that could improve drain and ditch maintenance county wide. It’s item 2A1 on the Commissioners Court Agenda. But it may take a while to implement. Here’s the background.

Untangling Overlapping Responsibilities

During recent storms, many blamed local flooding on lack of drain and ditch maintenance. The 80,000 cubic yards of silt clogging the lower portion of Ben’s Branch is just one example. Hundreds of others exist throughout the City of Houston and Harris County.

As the City and County Flood Control District tried to determine who was responsible for what, they became mired in legal tangles. Often, they discovered, both entities had responsibility for different portions of the same ditch.

But determining where one’s responsibilities stopped and the other’s started delayed mitigation and ran up legal fees. And even where responsibilities were clear cut, they wound up mobilizing two different crews, when one would have sufficed. This duplication of efforts ran up mitigation costs needlessly. It also often resulted in a patchwork quilt of repairs where one part of a ditch was maintained and another was not. And that reduced effectiveness.

Dividing Responsibilities by Core Competency

Luckily, common sense prevailed. The City and County reached an agreement in principle after Harvey to exchange responsibilities. Now each will focus on its core competency to maximize efficiency.

The goal: to get to a point where the City takes over responsibility for underground drainage and the County takes responsibility for above ground inside City limits.

One of the Flood Control District’s core competencies resides in ditch maintenance and improvements. Likewise, the City Public Works Department specializes in storm drains and sewers.

Any business school grad can tell you that companies maximize efficiency when focusing on their core competencies. The key: outsourcing parts of businesses where others offer greater efficiency.

Gradual Changeover In Series of Asset Swaps

However, the changeover won’t be like flipping a universal switch. It will happen gradually over several years with a series of asset swaps. Why? To ensure that neither side becomes saddled with deferred maintenance costs of the other.

Accordingly, each asset must be brought up to standards before swapping responsibilities.

See the explanation for Agenda Item 2A1 – The Houston City Council approved the interlocal agreement on February 27, 2020. Harris County Commissioners will vote on it on Tuesday, 4/28/2020.

Along with the agreement, the parties have identified the first batch of properties for exchange. However, they have not yet publicized those.

Only One Potential Problem

I only see one problem with this program. Some ditches that desperately need maintenance may not qualify for exchange before people flood.

Kings Forest, for example, has a ditch that parallels Valley Manor, west of Kingwood High School. Like Ben’s Branch, the City never maintained it. Now, water backs up dangerously close to homes on Kingsway Court and Twin Grove during heavy rains.

Rick Beaubien, a resident who lives near the ditch, took the pictures below.

Downed trees in ditch between Valley Manor and Twin Grove.
Clogged drain in same ditch.
North side of Kingwood Drive looking south. Trees and silt block channel and culverts. You can tell by the size of the trees that no one has maintained this ditch in a long time.
Same culverts, but in center of Kingwood Drive.
Exit of same culvert south of Kingwood Drive

Dustin Hodges, District E North Sector Manager for Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin indicates that Public Works is working on a plan to maintain this and other ditches. However, he also admits that “Currently, there are no available funds to address this ditch and there is no timeline on when any funds would be available for this ditch.”

Theory Good, Time Will Tell

I wholeheartedly support the asset-exchange program outlined in agenda item 2A1. Voting against it will not immediately accelerate the maintenance of ditches such as the one above. However, in principle and in the long run, it should help if the City and County treat neighborhoods equitably and partisan politics don’t intervene.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/26/2020 with thanks to Rick Beaubien

971 Days since Hurricane Harvey