Whittling Down the San Jacinto West Fork Mouth Bar

The State of Texas, Harris County and the City of Houston are whittling down the mouth bar of the San Jacinto West Fork – teaspoon by teaspoon. Just kidding; it only feels that way.

At the planned rate, the partners will remove approximately one third to one half of the planned 400,000 cubic yards of sediment by the start of hurricane season. But after waiting two and a half years since Hurricane Harvey, any and all progress is welcome! I’m not complaining.

The Mouth Bar Immediately After Harvey

Harvey deposited massive amounts of sediment in the area where the San Jacinto meets Lake Houston.

The mouth bar two weeks after Hurricane Harvey. With the exception of the treed areas on the extreme right, Harvey deposited virtually all the sand you see here plus more that you can’t see underwater.

The Army Corps of Engineers dredged a 600-acre area south of the mouth bar three feet deeper last summer. However, they barely touched the part of the mouth bar above water.

The mouth bar created a sediment dam behind the Lake Houston Dam that contributed to flooding more than 4100 structures in the Humble, Kingwood, and Atascocita areas.

Why Mouth Bar Formed Where It Did

The mouth bar formed where it did because the river water slows down when it meets the lake. The lower velocity causes sediment to drop out of suspension and accumulate faster.

While the Corps used hydraulic dredging to remove 500,000 cubic yards from the mouth bar in three months, the current phase uses mechanical dredging. Partners hope to remove another 400,000 cubic yards in 12 months. The process resembles whittling in that workers remove small chunks at a time.

Big Machines Dwarfed by Size of Job

Mechanical dredging uses large excavators. They load the sediment on pontoons. Tugs then push the pontoons upriver to a placement area. There, skid loaders remove the sediment and put it in trucks. The trucks cart it inland.

The excavators are currently nibbling away at the southern edge of the bar. I took all photos below on 3/6/2020.

Excavators are nibbling row after row, like from an ear of corn. This shot shows the immensity of the task.
They load one pontoon while another waits. The West Fork now has its own shuttle service. Unfortunately, round trip is still more than two hours.
These double pontoons can carry an estimated 160 cubic yards. Project goal: 400,000 cubic yards. That’s about 2,500 round trips for the pontoons.
Keeping the pontoon balanced requires coordination.
Tugs then push the pontoons upstream.
Dock of the placement area on Berry Madden’s property south of the West Fork, opposite River Grove Park boat dock on north shore.
From there, trucks haul the sediment inland out of the floodway, about a mile from the river. And the cycle repeats itself.

Mechanical vs. Hydraulic Dredging

The whole process resembles a five-mile long conveyor belt. It involves excavators, pontoons, tugs, trucks and more. Both mechanical and hydraulic dredging have advantages and disadvantages. Hydraulic dredging takes more time to mobilize, but re-suspends less sediment, and costs less per cubic yard of sediment removed. Mechanical dredging, on the other hand, can mobilize much faster.

At this point, returning to hydraulic dredging feels like a distant dream. No one is commenting on the possibility. But this picture speaks volumes.

Former Army Corps command post for West Fork Emergency Dredging project

It shows the once-bustling, but now-empty Army Corps command post. Just three months ago, it was filled with dredge pipe, spare parts, construction trailers, pontoons, booster pumps, survey boats, and more. Getting all that equipment back will be difficult.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/12/2020

926 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Houston Parks Board Makes Progress on Greenbelt Project South of Hamblen

Houston Parks Board continues making progress on creating a San Jacinto Greenway with a hike-and-bike trail. Their vision: to connect the Spring Creek Greenway to Kingwood’s trail network. They would do that by creating a trail between Hamblen Road and the West Fork. The trail would extend from the US59 pedestrian bridge near Harris County’s planned Edgewater Park to Woodland Hills Drive near River Grove Park.

Location of Demo Work

To clear a path for the greenway, the Houston Parks Board has acquired a property along Northshore Drive. It’s west of Sweet Bay Street and south of Hamblen Road (see map below).

Starting March 19, Houston Parks Board will begin demolishing structures on this property.

Schedule

The contractor will be Cherry Demolition. Their trucks will use Hamblen Road and Northshore Drive.

The job will start Thursday, March 19. It will run through Thursday, March 26, from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m.

If you see heavy equipment in the area, that’s what it is about.

Edgewater Park Still Planned, Just Delayed

Precinct Four still plans to construct Edgewater Park. Their plans have been delayed by reconstruction of the railroad bridge and changing design criteria. More news on the county’s plans in an upcoming post.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/12/2020

926 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Five Exposed HVL Pipelines Go Undercover; More Wetlands Drained

Five pipelines carrying highly volatile liquids (HVL) through the utility corridor that crosses the LMI River Road sand mine in Conroe have been buried again. Repairs have almost finished. Last Friday, crews were removing construction equipment and cleaning up. This significantly reduces risk to the public from a pipeline leak, rupture or explosion.

Erosion Triggered by Mining Too Close to Utility Corridor

Erosion from the mine first exposed the pipelines in 2014. The pipelines and mine reportedly argued about the fix in court for years. But after publication in December of aerial photos showing shoddy temporary fixes and badly sagging pipelines, residents lodged numerous complaints with the TCEQ, Mine Safety and Health Administration, Texas Railroad Commission, and the US Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.

Materials Stockpiled by January

Major repairs started in January. Contractors started stockpiling culvert, riprap, sand and other construction materials onsite.

Start of repairs. Photo taken January 20, 2020.

Construction Half Done in Mid-February

Construction was well underway a month later in February.

February 13, 2020

Cleanup Begins Early March

Last Friday, it was all over but the cleanup. Of course, cleanup in a sandmen is a relative term.

Looking north at utility corridor and pipeline repairs from over the mine’s main pit. This photo and those below taken on March 6, 2020.
Looking south toward main pit and river. Water flows from behind the camera position into these inlet pipes. Note the concrete overflow spillway to reduce future erosion.
A ditch not channels water to the new culverts. It also intercepts water flowing south toward the river (upper left).
Where the ditch turns toward the culvert, it appears to be 10 to 15 feet deep.
Reverse shot. Looking NE. Unfortunately, mining and erosion seem to have drained the wetlands.

Clogged Culvert a Future Risk

A big issue in the future may be sediment clogging the culverts.

Looking at all the sediment spewing from the culverts, one has to worry a bit about those culverts becoming clogged with sand and silt. No shortage of that around here!

Sadly, the wetlands lost since this episode started might have prevented some of that erosion.

Thanks to everyone who wrote regulatory agencies and complained about this situation. It helped produce a quick, happy resolution. Let’s chalk one up in the win column.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/11/2020

925 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Army Corps Finds Wetlands on Perry Homes Woodridge Village Property Did Not Fall Under Corps’ Jurisdiction; What Next?

Today, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released the findings of its investigation into the wetlands on Perry Homes’ Woodridge Village property. The Corps said that the wetlands do NOT fall under its jurisdiction. Therefore, there was no violation of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act when Perry wiped out wetlands without first seeking the Corps’ permission.

Congressman Dan Crenshaw’s office released this text of an email the Corps sent to them today.

Text of Corps Email to Congressman Crenshaw

“This e-mail is in response to your request (on the behalf of Congressman Crenshaw) to be updated on our investigation into activities on the Figure Four properties located in Porter, Montgomery County, Texas.  (Investigation file SWG-2019-00745).” [Editor’s note: Figure Four is the development arm of Perry Homes.]

“As discussed on the phone earlier today, the Corps of Engineers has finalized our investigation into this matter and did NOT find a violation of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Section 404).”  

“We did confirm the presence of uplands and wetlands on the tract. Some of the wetlands had fill material placed into them. Based on the facts associated with this specific location and per federal regulation these wetlands were determined to “isolated.” They lacked any known nexus to interstate commerce. As such, they are not “waters of the United States” and are not subject to federal jurisdiction under Section 404. In accordance with federal regulation the jurisdictional status (determination) of these wetlands was coordinated with the Environmental Protection Agency prior to finalizing.”     

“The property owner has been notified of the federal government’s findings and the investigation closed.”

Wetlands Question Now Moot from Legal Point of View

Normally, in cases where a question exists, developers consult the Corps before destroying the wetlands. When I asked the Corps last August whether Perry had sought a “jurisdictional determination,” the Corps answered that Perry had not.

Perry later claimed that it had hired a private consultant to determine whether the wetlands were jurisdictional. However, to my knowledge, Perry never publicly released the results of the survey. Today’s ruling by the Corps makes that whole controversy moot.

Regardless of the Corps’ rulings on the jurisdictional question, the fact remains that the Corps found wetlands on the property and they found Perry Homes had attempted to fill them in.

Wetlands Question Still Explosive from Business Point of View

Let’s see how well that worked out for Perry and its subsidiaries.

If Perry Homes tries to build on the land after all the publicity surrounding this case, any homeowner whose foundation cracks would have a ready-made court case.

Woodridge Village “wetlands” on March 6, 2020. Water has ponded there for months.

This land appears to be unsafe, unstable, unbuildable, unsaleable, and a menace to downstream homeowners in its current state.

Plaintiff’s Engineer Points to High Hurdles for Perry to Clear

David Givler, PE, a consultant for plaintiffs in the Elm Grove flooding case found that LJA Engineering, a Perry Homes’ contractor:

  • Seriously underestimated the amount of runoff from this property.
  • Used outdated rainfall statistics that led to underestimating the amount of detention capacity needed.
  • Constructed the overflow spillway between Taylor Gulley and detention pond S2 at a height that would cause North Kingwood Forest to flood.

When You’re In a Hole, Stop Digging. Literally.

It may be possible to fix some of these problems. But at what cost? Will the development ultimately be economic when residential lots are used to increase the size of detention ponds?

Five developers previously bought this land, studied it, and sold it rather than develop it. Maybe Perry should do the same. Maybe they should transfer it to Harris County Flood Control to create a giant detention facility.

How Perry Could Exit Without a Loss, Mitigate Flooding, Limit Long-Term Liability

A Houston Chronicle article quotes Houston Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin as saying that Perry quoted a price for the land that covered their acquisition cost PLUS the labor they have into it. That led Harris County to ask CoH to share the cost.

When CoH refused, Perry dropped the price to $14 million (the alleged purchase price) from $23 million, according to Community Impact newspaper. The Montgomery County Appraisal District values the land at only a little more than $1 million.

It will be very hard for Perry to sell the land and even harder to develop it. So why doesn’t Perry just donate the land to Harris County Flood Control to help them mitigate flooding?

According to a national real estate tax expert that I talked to, Perry could then write off the value of the land PLUS the value of the labor they have in it. For a billion dollar company, the tax deduction could easily EQUAL or come close to the price they are currently asking for the land.

It would also:

  • Give Perry a chance to recoup some shred of its once proud image.
  • Let Harris County Flood Control move forward quickly with a detention project that could truly mitigate flooding.
  • Help protect Perry from additional future flooding claims.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/10/2020

924 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 173 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.

Conveyance of Lower Ben’s Branch Nearly Restored

A flyover of the lower portion of Ben’s Branch on March 6, 2020, revealed that Harris County Flood Control has nearly restored its conveyance, even if some sediment still needs to be hauled off.

With most of lower Ben’s Branch cleaned out, the Kingwood Library (left), Kingwood Greens (right), and The Enclave (background) can now breathe much easier.

Among Hardest Hit Areas During Harvey

During Hurricane Harvey, some of the hardest hit areas in Kingwood bordered Ben’s Branch. Ben’s Branch cuts diagonally through Kingwood from St. Martha Catholic Church on the north to Town Center, Kingwood Greens, The Enclave, Kingwood Village Estates and Kings Harbor on the south. Post-Harvey surveys showed significant sediment buildup along the creek which reduced conveyance.

Twelve seniors in Kingwood Village Estates died after Harvey as a result of injuries sustained during the storm or the stress of losing their homes.

In August of last year, Harris County Flood Control began cleaning out the creek.

The project scoped by HCFCD is to remove approximately 80,000 cubic yards of sediment between the red line at Kingwood Drive and the YMCA at the bottom right of the circle.

Flood Control estimated they would need to remove 75,000 to 80,000 cubic yards to restore the conveyance. Despite a setback called Tropical Storm Imelda, the project has been moving along nicely.

Looking west from the West Lake Houston Parkway Bridge at Ben’s Branch before the project started. To get a sense of scale, that’s a HCFCD surveyor in the yellow jacket!
The same area today (looking west from a helicopter over the WLHP Bridge (lower left).

Here’s how the rest of the project looks.

East of the WLHP Bridge (foreground), some sediment is still drying along the banks before removal. However, the channel is open again for business.
The long stretch behind the Kingwood Town Center Apartments has been restored.
The stretch just south of Kingwood Drive by ReMax still needs clean-out and touch up.
The area just east of the YMCA is still being actively excavated.
Same area, still being actively excavated near YMCA.

Merchants and residents alike should breathe much easier during the upcoming hurricane season.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/10/2020

924 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Small, But Welcome Sign of Recovery: Taste of Greek

Greek food lovers in Kingwood received a small, but welcome sign of recovery this week – the community’s first Greek restaurant. It’s called Taste of Greek. And it opened in the shopping center next to the CVS pharmacy on the southeast corner of West Lake Houston Parkway and Kingwood Drive.

While the decor is modest, the taste is big.

Taste of Greek Grand Opening

Taste of Greek operated out of a food truck on North Park Drive for several years. I loved their food. But honestly, it was difficult to enjoy when the temperature climbed over a hundred in the shade.

I’ve been hooked on Greek food since going to college in Chicago. There’s a huge Greek community there. And I used to make regular pilgrimages down to Halsted Street for some of the best Greek food this side of the Atlantic. While Greek is not impossible to find in Houston, it takes some driving.

Family-Run and FRESH!

Now here’s the thing if you’re a gyros and baklava kind of person.

Taste of Greek beats every other Greek restaurant in Houston hands down. And it’s on a par with some of the best Greek food in Chicago.

The menu is not very lengthy and you find tablecloths, but OMG, is the food fresh! The pastries are better than “to die for.” They’re “to live for.”

Taste of Greek is a small family-run restaurant. The parents work the kitchen while the daughters serve and work the counter. They opened this weekend. My wife and I have eaten there TWICE so far. It’s that good.

An added bonus: seeing the pride in the eyes of a family that just graduated from operating a food truck to being the proprietors of a sit down restaurant.

Stop by and give them a try. If you like Greek food at all, I highly recommend it. Taste of Greek is guaranteed to take your mind off flood control.

Posted by Bob Rehak on March 9, 2020

723 Days since Hurricane Harvey

New Aerial Photos of River Grove Park Show Extent of Dredging Project

Since Hurricane Harvey, KSA has worked diligently to restore the damage to River Grove Park. It has been a massive job. Harvey filled in the lagoon in front of the boardwalk; left five feet of sand in the parking lot, disc golf course, and playing fields; and deposited a sand bar more than a quarter mile long and 12 feet high in front of the boat dock.

River Grove Waterfront on 9/14/2017, two weeks after Harvey. Lagoon filled in, five feet of sand filled the parking lot, and a 1400-foot, 12-foot-high sandbar blocked off the drainage ditch that empties the western third of Kingwood.

Army Corps Restored River Access

The Army Corps cut a channel through the sand bar that blocked the drainage ditch that empties the western third of Kingwood. That was a huge sigh of relief for a large part of Kingwood. But much work remained to restore the park itself. Among the last items on the agenda: restoring the lagoon and boat ramp access.

Dredging of Boat Dock Area and Lagoon

In late February 2020, KSA contractor Kayden Industries removed a 50-foot strip of vegetation that had grown up on sandbars in the lagoon. Then last week, they began dredging.

It’s hard to capture the scope of dredging operations from the ground – especially with access restricted for safety reasons. But last week, I did a flyover and captured these pics from a helicopter.

Looking west toward the River Grove Boat Ramp and Lagoon. Photo taken March 5, 2020. The dredge started by the boat dock and is working upstream now in the lagoon. Note the dewatering plant in the parking lot and the growing pile of spoils waiting for removal on the right.

In the photo above, you can see the 50-foot strip where Kayden removed vegetation. That will be the limit of dredging. KSA plans to remove 4-5 feet of sand from this area. The area still covered with grasses will remain wetlands. It will provide cover, habitat and food for birds and other species. That should help make River Grove a destination for birders again.

Harvey deposited sand several feet deep on the peninsula that defines the River Grove lagoon. That unfortunately killed many of the trees there. The wetlands remaining in the lagoon are now more important than ever. Eagles nest in the trees in the upper right of this photo on Romerica property.
The dredge started in the area in front of the boat dock and is working its way upstream in the lagoon. Water from the dredge goes through a floating pipe to a dewatering plant in the parking lot. Water is then returned to the lake in a closed-loop process.

A Bit of the Oil Field Comes to River Grove

The dewatering plant separates sand and sediment from the water before returning the water to the river. This is the same type of equipment used in oilfields to separate drilling cuttings from drilling mud, before recycling the mud.

Expected Finish By End of March

KSA expects the dredging project to finish by the end of March, weather permitting. However, the boat ramp may not open immediately. The heavy equipment has damaged the asphalt in the parking lot. Repairs and restriping may take a few weeks more.

Originally, KSA expected to remove 10,000 cubic yards of sediment. The contractor now predicts they will remove 11,000 to12,000 cubic yards to complete the scope of work.

Other Park Improvements

The good news: When all of this is done, River Grove Park should be back and better than ever. During repairs, KSA decided to:

  • Convert several of the soccer fields from “league fields” to “public fields.” Residents have long requested that change.
  • Change the speed bumps to milder speed humps in the traffic circle. Boaters have long requested that.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/9/2020

923 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Plaintiffs’ Engineer Alleges LJA Issued Misleading Studies, Followed Wrong Guidelines in Elm Grove Flooding Case

Fourteen documents filed with the Harris County District Clerk’s office on February 27, 2020, lay out the case of plaintiffs in the Elm Grove flooding case against LJA Engineering, Inc. Lawyers for the plaintiffs named LJA as an additional defendant in their most recent amended petition. Other defendants include Perry Homes’ subsidiaries and contractors: Figure Four Partners, LTD.; PSWA, Inc.; Rebel Contractors, Inc. (which recently changed its name); Double Oak Construction Inc.; and Texasite LLC.

Accusations Specific to LJA

The amended petition alleges LJA:

  • a. Failed to follow the correct drainage guidelines in Montgomery County;
  • b. Failed to provide adequate drainage in the Development;
  • c. Failed to adequately model the Development;
  • d. Failed to adequately report the modeling;
  • e. Removed drainage channels;
  • f. Caused post-development discharges and water surface elevation to increase downstream of the Development;
  • g. Failed to design detention ponds with adequate capabilities for rain events;
  • h. Failed to use the correct hydrology method;
  • i. Failed to design emergency overflows for the detention ponds;
  • j. Failed to notify the Developer Defendants and Contractor Defendants of the importance of the existing levee; and,
  • k. May be liable in other ways described in the consulting engineer’s report.

Consulting Engineer Says LJA Used Outdated Drainage Criteria Manual

The defendants’ consulting engineer, L. David Givler, MSCE, PE, provides the details that back up these claims. Givler is president of Givler Engineering, Inc. Givler’s firm is licensed in Texas to design drainage projects similar to Woodridge Village, which was designed by LJA. A “Certificate of Merit” filed with the court states Givler’s credentials and conclusions. Givler also provides thirteen more exhibits as part of his affidavit. (See links at bottom of post.)

Perhaps Givler’s most explosive finding: LJA based all of its conclusions on an outdated version of the Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual (DCM) developed in 1989. MoCo has since updated its DCM twice – in December 2014 and July 2019. Givler asserts that LJA should have used the 2014 version when it submitted its drainage analysis in 2018. The rainfall that MoCo requires engineering firms to design detention basins for have increased since 1989 (see below).

Givler asserts that the increases, along with other other errors and omissions outlined below critically skew modeling results. Ponds that might not overflow based on the 1989 rainfall depths do overflow with 2014 and 2019 rainfall statistics.

Critical Levee Removed, But LJA Did Not Model Effect of That

Givler says in his testimony that grading associated with the construction project removed a levee that had been constructed along the south side of Taylor Gully. “Prior to being removed, the levee had successfully protected the Elm Grove Village Subdivision from flooding,” said Givler. “However, removal of the levee increased the probability for Taylor Gully to overflow southward and to flood the Elm Grove Village Subdivision.”

Givler asserts that the levee successfully protected Elm Grove from flooding in previous extreme events such as Hurricane Harvey, which he characterized as a 330-year storm.

LJA Did Not Use MoCo’s Recommended Method For Modeling Runoff

Mr. Givler also found that LJA did not use Montgomery County’s recommended method for modeling runoff. LJA used something called the Clark’s Unit Hydrograph Method instead of the NRCS Hydrograph Method specified in the 2014 version of the County’s Drainage Criteria Manual. The latter shows significantly higher peak runoff rates, according to Givler. “LJA’s selection of an alternative method (The Clark Method) caused the underestimation of peak runoff rates,” said Givler. “LJA also used low, outdated rainfall depths in its model, which exacerbated the underestimating of the peak runoff rates.”

Givler modeled whether LJA’s designs for the Woodridge Detention Ponds would have successfully held the runoff from the updated drainage criteria manual.

He found that the design for the ponds was “inadequate.” They overflowed. Significantly, Givler also found that LJA underestimated the volume of runoff sent downstream to Taylor Gully.

After May, Protection Not Implemented Against September Storm

“Even after the May 2019 flood, adequate measures had not been implemented to restore the pre­-development level of protection or to prevent a recurrence,” said Givler. “Under Woodrige Village pre­-development conditions, the Elm Grove Village subdivision was safe from flooding during the 330-year Hurricane Harvey rainfall. However, under construction conditions at Woodrige Village, Elm Grove Village was vulnerable to flooding in the 19-year and 92-year rainfall events.”

LJA Did Not Model Effect of Overflow Channel

Givler also noted that LJA’s plan claimed that the 100-year peak stage for the S2 detention pond would be 73.21. That would be high enough to cause water to backup into the grass-lined channel (bottom elevation 68.50) located at the northeast corner of the pond. “Since the highest adjoining ground elevation south and east of the grass-lined channel is approximately 72,” said Givler, “the peak 100-year stage would discharge to Taylor Gully downstream of the project and to the neighborhood east of pond S-2 [North Kingwood Forest]. Such discharges would increase flooding to the residential lots to the east…”

Figure 4 from Page 12 of Givler’s affidavit shows 100-year runoff overflowing Pond S-2 through the Grass-Lined Channel.
The grass-lined overflow spillway in the center of this photo is designed to funnel water from Taylor Gulley into the kite-shaped detention pond (S2) if the concrete channel overflows. But Givler says LJA did not model the opposite. In May and September 2019, water flowed from the gulley into the homes at the bottom left of the frame, as well as homes opposite them on the far side of the gully.

Emergency Overflow System Not Provided

Another problem that Givler found: Section 7.3.13 of the Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual (2014 version) requires an emergency overflow system shall be provided “…designed to carry the 100-year allowable detention basin discharge at full-bank conditions… The emergency overflow system shall direct flows into an outfall channel and prevent flow in the direction of developed areas.” (as quoted by Givler).

Even today, the project does not include such an overflow system.

Runoff During Construction More Severe than Ultimate Buildout Conditions

Givler modeled actual construction conditions after the May storm. He found that “…with the project site cleared and stripped of vegetation, runoff conditions were more severe than even the ultimate buildout condition. LJA’s analysis does not address this condition,” he says. His analysis showed that under construction conditions, LJA’s partially-constructed detention ponds were inadequate, unable to contain the May 2019 runoff and the 100-year runoff.”

The temporary construction conditions he says, “caused the ponds to overflow and to discharge runoff to the Elm Grove Village subdivision at a peak rate of approximately 2,110 cubic feet per second.”

Water running through North Kingwood Forest into Elm Grove (background) during Imelda as Keith Stewart evacuates his family.

“LJA Failed to Act as a Reasonably Prudent Engineering Firm”

In his conclusions, Givler alleges that “LJA failed to act as a reasonably prudent engineering firm.” He added, “…three professional engineers and the engineering firm were negligent in the provision of professional services that they rendered, and they committed various actions, errors, or omissions in providing professional services by violating standards required by Montgomery County.”

In Givler’s opinion, LJA failed to comply with Montgomery County standards by:

  • a. Using an alternate (Clark) hydrology method rather than the NRCS method recommended by Montgomery County, resulting in the underestimation of the amount of runoff that the watershed would discharge to the detention ponds.
  • b. Using rainfall depths in the hydrology models which are smaller than what was required by the applicable county standard (2014 DCM) and that are much smaller than recently adopted values (2019 DCM).
  • c. Designing detention ponds, which are too small to contain and too small to detain or attenuate the 100-year design flood.
  • d. Failing to design adequate freeboard for the detention ponds.
  • e. Failing to design adequate emergency overflows for the detention ponds.
  • f. Designing a project, which diverts runoff to properties of others in a harmful and detrimental manner.
  • g. Allowing peak runoff discharges downstream of the project to increase due to the impact of the project and due to the limited effectiveness of the detention ponds.
  • h. Allowing water surface elevations downstream of the project to increase due to the impact of the project and due to the limited effectiveness of the detention ponds.
  • i. Erroneously representing that the project had no impact on downstream areas.
  • j. Failing to notify the contractor of the importance of the existing levee.
  • k. Failing to guide the contractor in a logical construction sequence that would reduce the flood risk during construction.

Violation of Professional Standards and Ethics Also Alleged

Mr. Givler also alleges that LJA and three of its employees violated standards established by the State of Texas and the Texas Board of Professional Engineers in the Texas Engineering Practice Act. “This negligence caused and/or contributed to the endangerment of lives, health, safety, property and welfare of hundreds of people near the project,” he says. They did this, he asserts, “by issuing misleading reports, which failed to indicate the increase in flood potential.”

Questions Remain

“I recognize that additional documents may be produced,” said Givler, “which I will be asked to review and, therefore, reserve the right to add to or to modify this affidavit based on information that may be provided to me at a later time.”

Except for general denials, neither LJA, nor any of the other defendants in this case have responded publicly yet to Givler’s specific allegations.

When LJA and the other defendants make their positions public, I shall review them and give them “equal time.”

The big questions I have at this time are:

  • Why would a firm with LJA’s substantial reputation make the blunders that Givler asserts? Were they pressured into producing a favorable report that made the economics of the project “work”?
  • Five previous developers owned this land and, after studying it, decided not to develop it. That certainly should have raised red flags for LJA and Perry, and caused them to review this closely. There must have been scuttlebutt circulating among local professionals. One engineer I consulted said Friendswood walked away from this property decades ago because it would have been too hard to develop. However, Perry decided to move forward based on dubious studies and incomplete data. Why?
  • What did Concourse Development, Woodbridge 268, Reddy Partnership, Kingwood 575, Lennar Homes of Texas/Friendswood know that Perry Homes did not?

Supporting Documents

Check out the original text of Mr. Givler’s affidavit and exhibits for yourself to ensure I summarized them fairly. His affidavit includes his findings, professional opinions, conclusions and Exhibit 1, his resume.

Exhibit 2 includes the list of documents Givler reviewed in developing his affidavit.

Exhibit 3 includes topographic mapping for construction and pre-construction conditions.

Exhibit 4 includes a topographic map showing the location of the former levee.

Exhibit 5 includes the approval letter by Montgomery County.

Exhibit 6 includes the rainfall values used by LJA.

Exhibit 7 includes a meteorology report.

Exhibit 8 includes reported locations of flooded properties.

Exhibit 9 includes the drainage impact analysis submitted by LJA on March 26, of 2018.

Exhibit 10 includes the drainage impact analysis submitted by LJA on August 28, of 2018.

Exhibit 11 includes Givler’s hydrology model for pre-development conditions.

Exhibit 12 includes Givler’s hydrology model for construction conditions.

Exhibit 13 includes Givler’s hydrology model for post-development conditions.

Exhibit 14 includes LJA’s design for detention pond S2, the one north of Village Springs.

Posted by Bob Rehak on March 8, 2020 based on testimony from David Givler PE

922 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 171 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.

Staring Down the Barrel of a 268-Acre Water Cannon

The land in Woodridge Village naturally slopes from north to south and west to east. That means it forms a funnel pointed at Taylor Gulley in the southeast portion of the development. During heavy rains, as we saw last May and September, that funnel turns into a water cannon aimed at Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest. These new aerial photos show where the water is aimed.

Looking toward southeast, you can see how all the land in Woodridge Village slopes toward the far corner. North Kingwood Forest is the group of houses you can see in front of the water tower. Elm Grove is behind those and also the far tree line right of those.

When the land above was wooded and populated only by forest and wetlands, water percolated through the area slowly. Now that the Perry Homes’ gang clearcut the entire 268 acres, water shoots through it like the barrel of a water cannon.

“What Happens If We Cross The Streams?”

LJA Engineers designed the drainage for this development so that virtually all water would converge in the kite-shaped detention pond below before flowing into Taylor Gulley.

Looking west from the southeastern corner of Woodridge Village. North Kingwood Forest is at the bottom of the frame and Elm Grove is tucked into the trees in the upper left and beyond. Virtually all water from the development flows to the pond in the center of this photo. Then it flows through the twin culverts into Taylor Gully on the left.

When the pond fills and water starts to back up, channel starts flowing through the backwards of the homes at the bottom of the photo above.

Looking southwest. Water flows from top to bottom and right to left. Water from Taylor Gulley, the channel that forms a V above, must either squeak through a 3 foot pipe at the end of the concrete section on the left, or make a double U-turn into the detention pond and then back into the gulley on the left. That’s like forcing traffic make a U turn in the center of a busy intersection.

It reminds me of that immortal scene from the 1984 movie Ghostbusters. What happens when you cross the streams, Egon?

Egon: Don’t cross the streams.
Peter: Why?
Egon: It would be bad.
Peter: I’m fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean “bad”?
Egon: Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
Raymond: Total protonic reversal.
Peter: That’s bad. Okay. Alright, important safety tip, thanks Egon.

Obviously, the LJA Engineers who designed this drainage either didn’t see the movie or didn’t take it seriously.

Dumping Overflow into Surrounding Streets and Homes

In the photo below, you can see where the water goes when the streams cross during heavy rains. The pond and the stream (Taylor Gulley) leading to it become water cannons when they overflow. Water shoots into the homes in North Kingwood Forest (right). It also shoots down the streets of Elm Grove (bottom left).

Looking north up Village Springs Drive toward Woodridge Village. Virtually all water from the development converges in the kite-shaped detention pond. During floods, overflows shoots down Village Springs or into North Kingwood Forest (right).

Below are links to two videos that show water overflowing from the detention pond into Village Springs Drive and the homes there.

The first is from May 7th by Edy Cogdill.

The second is from September 19th by Alyssa Harris.

Of course, part of the problem with crossing these streams is that Perry Homes still has only installed 23% of the detention. There’s just no way that 23% can do the job of 100%. The rest of that water has to go somewhere else. Like living rooms, kitchens, and bedrooms.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/7/2020 with thanks to Dan Aykroyd, Harold Ramis, Alyssa Harris and Edy Cogdill

921 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 170 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.

Elm Grove Lawsuits: New Defendant, New Charges, Amended Petition and More

Court documents filed with the Harris County District Clerk show that the tempo of the Elm Grove lawsuits against Perry Homes, its subsidiaries and contractors is increasing. Litigants have filed 20 new documents in the last three weeks. The judge has set a trial date for July 13, 2020. That’s about three months from now.

Plaintiffs File Fifth Amended Petition

The big news: Plaintiffs filed their fifth amended petition. LJA Engineering Inc. has been brought into the suit and named as an additional defendant.

Plaintiffs allege that LJA, when designing the drainage for Woodridge Village, used an outdated Montgomery County Drainage Criteria Manual. LJA went by the 1989 version when an updated 2014 version existed. Since then, MoCo has revised the documents yet again. A 2019 version now exists that took effect before Imelda last year. (Note: the link above leads to the updated manual, however, MoCo did not update the date on the cover page. So this gets very confusing.)

List of Charges Expands

Plaintiffs’ lawyers have added negligent retention and negligent supervision to the list of charges. They now accuse defendants of:

  • a. Removing drainage from the Development;
  • b. Removing a levee from the Development site;
  • c. Blocking the drainage channels;
  • d. Filling in existing drainage channels;
  • e. Failing to properly install box culverts;
  • f. Failing to create temporary drainage channels;
  • g. Failing to allow adequate drainage after construction;
  • h. Failing to install silt barriers;
  • i. Allowing the Development to force rainfall toward Plaintiffs’ homes;
  • j. Failing to pay proper attention


Plaintiffs argue that “the Contractor Defendants had actual, subjective awareness of the risk involved, but nevertheless proceeded with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others.”

The streets of Elm Grove are still littered with trash from reconstruction of their homes after Imelda – the second flood in 2019. This image was taken on Village Springs in February of 2020.

Accusations Specific to LJA

The amended petition also lists charges specific to LJA.

  • a. Failing to follow the correct drainage guidelines in Montgomery County;
  • b. Failing to provide adequate drainage in the Development;
  • c. Failing to adequately model the Development;
  • d. Failing to adequately report the modeling;
  • e. Removing drainage channels;
  • f. Causing post-development discharges and water surface elevation to increase downstream of the Development;
  • g. Failing to design detention ponds with adequate capabilities for rain events;
  • h. Failing to use the correct hydrology method;
  • i. Failing to design emergency overflows for the detention ponds;
  • j. Failing to notify the Developer Defendants and Contractor Defendants of the importance of the existing levee; and,
  • k. Other ways described the consulting engineer’s report.

Plaintiffs Seek Exemplary Damages and Mandatory Injunction

The plaintiffs now seek exemplary damages and a mandatory injunction that forces defendants to return the property to its prior condition, wherein the surface water runoff properly flows into the drainage ditch.

Defendants also filed the reports of two expert witnesses: an engineer from Pennsylvania, who examined LJA’s performance, and another expert, who will testify about the magnitude of rainfalls on May 7th and September 19th. More on those in a future post.

No Response Yet from Defendants to Specific Charges

We still have yet to see the defendants’ specific responses to any of these charges except for the general denials they made last year.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/6/2020

920 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 169 since Imelda