Keep your eye on the sky for more severe-weather threats this week. Harris County Flood Control Meteorologist Jeff Linder warns that the coming week could bring us 5-7 inches of rain, and higher totals in places. He says the upper level trough setting up over the southwestern US will send us one storm after another. Linder compared the current pattern to those in the springs of 2015 and 2016. We saw multiple floods across Texas in both of those years.
Rainfall total forecast for May 5 through 12.
Monday Night/Tuesday: Saturating Soils
A strong disturbance will move into southeast Texas on Monday night and Tuesday with widespread showers and thunderstorms. Heavy rainfall of 1-2 inches with higher isolated totals will be possible along with a slight severe weather threat. Lindner thinks “most of the area will be able to handle this round of rainfall as long as there is no sustained cell training that develops and the overall forward progression of the system remains fast enough to prevent rainfall totals from piling up.” What this system will likely accomplish is further saturation of the soil over the area. Lindner calls it a “primer” event for more sustained heavy rainfall toward the end of the week.
Thursday-Saturday: Flood, Severe Weather Threats
Another strong storm system will approach toward the end of the week along with a slow moving and stalling surface frontal boundary. An extremely moist air mass along with the overall slow eastward progression of the storm system moving out of Mexico are significant heavy-rainfall signals during this period. Lindner expects several inches as several rounds of slow-moving thunderstorms impact the region. Flooding and severe weather will be possible during this period.
Rainfall Totals and Flood Risk
Rainfall totals over the next 5 days should average 4-5 inches over much of southeast Texas and there will almost certainly be higher isolated totals. The widespread nature of the incoming weather this week on top of increasingly saturated grounds, and already swollen rivers, creek, and bayous increases the flooding threat. Main concern will be the Brazos, Trinity, and San Jacinto River basins and toward the end of the week the Harris County bayous and creeks if the current forecast holds.
Exact timing of the rainfall and storms as well as amounts and locations of the higher totals will be in flux over the next 5 days.
The Tax and Memorial Day Floods in 2015 and 2016 did as much damage as many hurricanes. So it would be good to prepare an evacuation kit, just in case. Here are some tips.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/image001-1.gif?fit=750%2C562&ssl=1562750adminadmin2019-05-05 15:53:362019-05-05 16:15:56Severe Weather, Heavy Rainfall Threats Return for Much of This Week
Storms during the last two days were traumatic for virtually everyone in the Kingwood area. Tragically, one person lost her life when her car hit a downed tree.
Others lost vehicles, trees, and sleep.
Torrential rains for a brief period – at the rate of 4-5 inches in an hour – flooded streets and vehicles.
They also brought water near or into homes.
Parents picking children up from school waited in rising waters as their students sheltered in place.
A small tornado may have briefly touched down near Town Center.
Kingwood Drive was shut down for hours during the Friday afternoon rush hour.
People traumatized by Harvey were re-traumatized.
People without power waited and wondered for hours about what was going on around them.
Lake Conroe: One Less Worry This Time
Despite all that, we did NOT have to worry about one thing: Lake Conroe opening its flood gates again during this storm. The seasonal lowering policy established last year worked.
The SJRA board voted to lower the lake’s level one foot to 200 mean feet above sea level (MSL) from April 1 to May 31.
That action may have saved the Lake Houston area from additional flooding in the last round of storms.
Releasing Water Continuously At Low Rate Created Extra Capacity
Lake Conroe had released water continuously since April 1 at a slow, controlled rate of 350 to 550 cubic feet per second. However, because of spring rains, Lake Conroe had only dropped about a half foot from 201 to 200.66 feet MSL. Had the releases not happened, the lake would have been an estimated 1-1.5 feet higher, according to Mark Micheletti, an SJRA board member from Kingwood. That means the lake level would have been approaching 202 feet, the level at which the SJRA automatically begins releasing water, when the storm hit. That would have forced the SJRA to release water at a higher rate that could have overloaded the downstream watershed.
Buffer Against Downstream Flooding Worked
In other words, the policy worked. The seasonal lowering provided a buffer against downstream flooding. NOAA shows a double crest on the San Jacinto West Fork at US59 during the last two days that coincided with two waves of storms. At peak flow, the river came within about two feet of going out of its banks.
An additional foot of water released from Lake Conroe would have added two feet to Lake Houston and created flooding.
About a mile downstream at River Grove Park, the water was up, but still within its banks.
Despite torrential rains last night and early this morning, the West Fork remained in its banks. The river was up, but no homes flooded from the river.
Success: No Rivers or Streams Out of Banks
At this hour, neither NOAA, the SJRA, nor Harris County Flood Control, predicts any flooding from yesterday’s storms. In fact, all streams and bayous seem to be receding at this time. That’s one less thing to worry about as we clean up from the latest storm. The SJRA’s seasonal lowering DID help.
Remember, Lake Conroe is almost twice as big as Lake Houston (33 sq. mi. vs 18.5 sq. mi.). So one foot released there translates into almost two feet here. And two feet would likely have forced the San Jacinto out of its banks for the fifth time in a year.
Kudos to the SJRA board, the City of Houston, and the TCEQ for enabling this policy. That, in conjunction with the City’s pre-release policy for Lake Houston, have made a difference.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/5/2019
614 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/hmmt2_hg-1.png?fit=600%2C465&ssl=1465600adminadmin2019-05-04 22:51:322020-01-17 08:59:15One Less Thing to Worry About in Latest Storm: How Seasonal Lowering of Lake Conroe Helped
During Harvey, most of the damage in Kingwood happened from river flooding. Yesterday, it happened from street flooding. What are the respective causes? Differences? Fixes?
River Grove Park the morning after the street flooding during the previous day and night. The river was still well within its banks and is not predicted to come out.
River Flooding Overview
River flooding happens when heavy rainfall exceeds the conveyance capacity of a river. In other words, the river comes up and out of its banks. This happened to the San Jacinto during Harvey. The river, normally a couple hundred feet wide, became three to four miles wide, inundating miles from the main current.
River flooding can be caused by heavy rain, upstream snow melt, dam/levee breaks, dam releases, and more. Most commonly, it takes hours to days for water to work its way through a river system and affect people downstream.
River Flooding Remedies
Fixes for river flooding include things like:
Building dams upstream to reduce the flow downstream.
Increasing the conveyance of the river through widening, deepening or dredging
Removing blockages such as the mouth bar on the West Fork of the San Jacinto
Increasing the outflow capacity, for instance by adding gates to dam
Building levees
Diverting water to tunnels.
Street Flooding Overview
Street flooding, on the other hand, is often much more local and happens over shorter periods of time. It is often referred to as flash flooding because it comes up quickly and goes down quickly. That’s what the Lake Houston Area experienced yesterday. The San Jacinto, its tributaries and drainage ditches were and still are well within their banks.
Flash flooding occurs when the rainfall RATE temporarily exceeds the drainage capacity of storm drains, sewers, swales, and ditches that lead to rivers.
Yesterday, we received 1/20th the amount of rainfall that we did during Harvey, but many people reported the water coming up higher. That’s because storm sewers could not handle the intense rainfall that happened during approximately a one hour period.
Drains on Valley Manor could not handle the sudden surge.
Streets Designed as Part of Flood Retention System
The streets in Kingwood (and most cities) are actually designed to be part of the flood retention system. When developers excavate streets, they often use the fill to build up homesites. By increasing the elevation difference between street level and your foundation, they reduce the chances that you will flood.
They size the sewers so as not to make drainage ditches overflow. Rainfall rates like we experienced yesterday don’t happen for very long. The storm passes. The water in the street goes down and life returns to normal. You just don’t want to be caught out on the road in your car when it happens. Nor do you want to have your car parked on the street!
Street Flooding Remedies
The Greater Houston Flood Mitigation Consortiums’ report on Harvey contains an extensive discussion of the different types of flooding. Their discussion of street flooding starts on page 14. Page 15 identifies solutions, including:
Communicate the role of streets in the drainage system. Many residents may not be aware that roads are intended to act as a secondary short-term storage system and/or conveyance pathway for water. This can lead to severe property damage and loss of life when residents do not move property out of harm’s way. For example, recent street flooding has caused severe flooding of cars, which are frequently parked in the street. It is also important to note that 12 inches of water can float a sedan and 18-24 inches can float a larger vehicle, creating hazardous road conditions during extreme events. It is critical to develop a strategy to communicate to the public that streets are designed to be a secondary short-term storage system so that people can take action to prevent loss of property and life.
Address debris in streets and waterways. Maintaining clear openings to storm sewer inlets is a great way to help reduce street flooding. Flooding in many neighborhoods can be made worse by debris and floating trashcans that clog inlets. Additional city, county and MUD maintenance, or organized community efforts may be required.
Ensure that developers have sufficient “upstream” information. Land development engineers typically focus on mitigating the runoff generated by their development project, and as such, flows entering onto their site from other sources may not be considered in their design analysis. Examining strategies to share information about upstream conditions with developers during the design analysis phase could help maximize site-based mitigation.
Maximize on-site retention. Green infrastructure may provide a viable alternative for managing stormwater and reducing nuisance flooding through implementing on-site retention or by providing additional in-line storage capacity within the street (examples include Cottage Grove and Bagby Street).
Identify & target high-risk areas. Determining the neighborhoods most vulnerable to flooding from local drainage challenges would be a pivotal step to targeting public education and mitigation strategies.
For More Information
The flooding yesterday happened so quickly that it scared people. For many, it brought back vividly the trauma of Harvey and the pain that followed. One person even died when her car ran into a downed tree that fell across Kingwood Drive.
The most damage happened, not to homes, but to vehicles caught in high water on flooded streets – streets DESIGNED to hold water. There’s a simple answer to that. Unfortunately many people did not get the warnings that could have kept them off the streets.
For more information on different types of flooding, see the first part of this FloodWarn Training Seminar that Katie Landry-Guyton of the National Weather Service presented last year at Kingwood College.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/4/19
613 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/5.3.19-rain.jpg?fit=1500%2C2000&ssl=120001500adminadmin2019-05-04 12:23:012019-05-04 12:23:24Street Flooding vs. River Flooding
A strong line of thunderstorms with high winds, torrential rains and possible tornadoes swept through the Lake Houston area this afternoon. It left widespread power outages, snarled traffic, flooded streets, and swollen creeks and ditches. People still suffering PTSD from Harvey were re-traumatized by the sound of news helicopters and water creeping up their front steps. More heavy rains tonight will add to the area’s woes, even as people are still cleaning up from this afternoon’s flooding.
Examples of Damage Reported
Among the damage reported:
Several flooded homes in Bear Branch and Woodland Hills near creeks or ditches
Flooded locker rooms at Kingwood High School
Trees down and blocking Kingwood Drive at rush hour
Power lines down on Kingwood Drive
Knee-high water on Kingwood Drive at Town Center
Kingwood Drive traffic rerouted up Valley Manor
New pad sites for the retail expansion of the HEB center under water
Street flooding from one end of Kingwood to the other
Streets Designed as Part of Flood Retention System
Note: the streets in Kingwood are DESIGNED as part of the flood retention system. When rainfall rates exceed what creeks, ditches and bayous can handle, water backs up into streets. and drainage swales.
The amount of rain we received today was not great. But the intensity was off the charts. In about a half hour at my house, we received almost two inches. That’s between 3 and 4 inches per hour. Here’s an example: the swale beside my house.
Valley Manor just north of Kingwood Drive at 4PM on 5.3.19. Two neighbors across the street reports water on their front steps. One said water started to come through her front door. The family is still repairing from Harvey. Her entire family is traumatized.This is the ditch adjacent to the retail expansion of the H-E-B center. Photo courtesy of Mark Micheletti.Kingwood Drive west of Town Center. Photo courtesy of Clay Crawford.Kingwood Drive at Town Center.Photo courtesy of Clay Crawford.I heard that the entrance to Fosters Mill was also under water.Video of street in Riverchase by John Knoerzer.
Rainfall Totals for Friday Storm
Rainfall totals for last 24 hours as of 10PM 5.3.19. Note higher totals upstream from Lake Houston area.
River Report: Minor Flooding Possible on West Fork
Harris County Flood Warning System’s Real Time Inundation Mapping shows most streams within their banks. But note the warning for Humble at US59. While the river is 2 feet below the top of bank as of 10PM, it could easily go out of bank tonight.
More Storms on Way
As of 9PM a severe thunderstorm watch is still in effect for much of southeast Texas until 3PM Saturday..A large line of strong to severe thunderstorms has developed from E of Austin to NW of San Antonio and is moving ESE/SE at 15-20mph. Expect an average 1-2 inches with the line passage. Isolated total up to 3 inches be common. Creeks and bayous should be able to handle that amount of rainfall, according to Jeff Lindner of Harris County Flood Control.
NOAA forecast clearly shows the line of strong thunderstorms that should hit us overnight.
Here is an updated radar image as of 12:01 AM Saturday morning.
Image courtesy of RadarScope, an amazing app!
Expect minor flooding at 59 and River Grove Park, that could be exacerbated by the mouth bar and other sediment still in the river.
This does not account for any local effects to the mouth bar.
Hoping you stay dry!
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/3/19 around midnight
613 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/KWD-TC.jpg?fit=1500%2C1125&ssl=111251500adminadmin2019-05-03 23:19:552019-05-04 00:47:07Overnight Rains Could Add to This Afternoon’s Woes
Jeff Lindner, Director of Hydrologic Operations and Division Meterologist for Harris County Flood Control, just issued this warning”
“Multiple rounds of thunderstorms with heavy rainfall and some severe weather likely today into tonight.”
“Large cluster of thunderstorms with heavy rainfall extends from near Sealy to College Station and is moving eastward and will overspread much of the region N of I-10 over the next several hours. A second…powerful…bow echo with 70-80mph is rapidly approaching Corpus Christi and the coastal bend and may impact the Matagorda Bay area later this morning.”
“Active pattern will remain in place as several disturbances and a weak cold front move across the area today and tonight and into Saturday. Rounds of thunderstorms will produce heavy rainfall and isolated severe weather. Main severe threats today will be mainly west of I-45 and some of the storms this morning over south-central TX have shown some weak rotation.”
“Expect the current round of storms to move across the area between now and 1-2pm followed by a brief break and then another…potentially stronger round this evening into the overnight period.”
“Rainfall amounts of 1-3 inches will be possible today into early Saturday with isolated higher totals. In fact some of the higher resolution models are showing isolated amounts up to 4-5 inches under training bands today and tonight. Air mass is certainly moist and will be able to support some 1-2 inch per hour rainfall rates which will lead to street flooding.”
River Forecast
“Area rivers are responding to the recent heavy rainfall and will remain elevated and in flood (Trinity). Additional rains today and tonight and then again next week will only increase rises. The area river and hydro situation is starting to become worrisome given the potential for this pattern to maintain for the next 1-2 weeks.”
Posted by Bob Rehak on April 3, 2019
612 Days since Hurricane Harvey
00adminadmin2019-05-03 09:41:282019-05-03 09:41:53Possible Street Flooding Today
I visited Placement Area 1 this morning . Muck was shooting out of the “diffuser pipe” at 470 cubic yards per hour. That’s enough to fill up 47 dump trucks every hour! A truly impressive sight. So I grabbed my Nikon D5 and started clicking. Only after downloading the images did I realize that I had the shutter set to 1/8000th of a second.
Liquid Looks Like Glass at 1/8000th
Normally, when shooting flowing water, you want to use shutter speeds in the range of 1/8th to 1/60th of a second. Slower speeds blur the liquid and create a sense of motion. The faster speed, however, froze the motion and made the liquid look like glass.
In photography, sometimes mistakes make the shot. This may have been one of those times. As I stared at the effluent, I became transfixed by the thousands of bursting bubbles within it. You can also see how the further the “spray” gets from the pipe, the bursting bubbles begin to reform into smaller droplets.
Effect of Diffusion Pipe
Dredgers call this a diffusion pipe because of those rings on the end of it. They allow the dredger to control the spread of the effluent. By adjusting the spread, they can make it shoot out far like a fire hose or spread out wide.
In this case, they had it set to “wide” so that it would be more controllable.
Diffuser pipe at Placement Area #1 shooting out effluent at 470 cubic yards per minute. Shot with a Nikon D5 at 1/8000th of a second.A slightly wider shot shows sand piling up. All the water in the effluent finds its way back into the river after sediment drops out of suspension and it is filtered by gravity.This shot shows three separate activities: a) the pit being filled, b) an excavator moving sand out of the flow, and c) loading a sand truck which will haul it away.
Now Selling Sand from Placement Area #1
A worker told me that early last week, the pit owner started selling sand from the site to an asphalt company. At the present rate, they are hauling it away about half as fast as the pit is being filled. This will help create extra storage area in the pit should the US Army Corps of Engineers choose to use it for the next phase of dredging – the mouth bar.
Max Flow Rates
As impressive as this flow is, I’m told it can go even higher – up to about 1,000 cubic yards per hour. The rate depends on factors such as the density and hardness of the spoils, as well as the distance they are pumped.
Details Still Being Worked Out on Mouth Bar
Still no official word yet on details of Phase 2 – the mouth bar project. The Corps is still evaluating placement areas. It could be that they need to permit more than one to contain the entire mouth bar. However, they also need to move quickly to make sure the dredgers don’t move on to another job.
Because of the lengthy amount of time permitting a placement area can take, the Corps may try to buy time by directing spoils to one or both of the current placement areas which are already permitted.
The more sand that pit owners can sell, the more capacity they will have, and the faster phase two of West Fork dredging can start.
FEMA will not pay to remove the entire mouth bar. FEMA has been working with the Corps and the City of Houston to determine how much of the mouth bar was due to Harvey. By statute, that’s all FEMA can pay to remove.
Variables Complicate Decisions
The City, State and Harris County will have to pay to remove the rest. That’s part of the contingency planning at this point. No details have yet been released about how all the pieces of this jigsaw puzzle will fit together.
Planners are now trying to optimize for at least ten variables that I have heard discussed.
Volume due to Harvey
Time required to dredge it
Available storage in existing placement areas
Additional cost to move it to those placement areas (pipe, booster pumps, fuel, etc.)
Productivity loss due to additional distance from mouth bar
Cost versus amount funded by FEMA
Placement areas and cost for any volume FEMA does not fund
Time required to permit new placement area(s)
Where money will come from to cover what FEMA does not cover
When additional funds will be available
Not simple! We can only wish that they could make the decision in 1/8000th of a second.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/2/2019
611 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/PA1-5.2.19-CU_01.jpg?fit=1500%2C1007&ssl=110071500adminadmin2019-05-02 16:44:452019-05-02 16:47:37What 470 Cubic Yards of Muck Per Hour Looks Like at 1/8000th of a Second
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ’s) letter to the Corps expresses eight pages of concerns. Keep in mind that it was dated March 1. So the developer had it for TWO MONTHS. Also remember! TCEQ was reviewing ONLY water-quality issues posed by the development.
For everyone else, I have summarized the main concerns below.
Title 30, Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Chapter 279.ll(c)(l), states that “No discharge shall be certified if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, … ” “Please have the applicant clarify the purpose and need for the project, as portions of the proposed project are not aquatic-dependent.”
From the public notice, the applicant states that “they have avoided and minimized environmental impacts by configuring the location of the proposed structures and reducing the size of the lakes within each district.” “This statement does not detail how and where wetland and stream impacts were avoided or minimized. Please have the applicant explain how and where impacts to stream and wetland resources were minimized and avoided.”
“The applicant proposes to develop a mitigation site or purchase credits but says nothing more…The compensatory mitigation plan must include the objectives, site selection, the site protection instrument, baseline information, how the compensatory mitigation will provide required compensation for unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources, a mitigation work plan, maintenance plan, ecological performance standards, monitoring requirements, long-term management plan, adaptive management plan, financial assurances, and other information per the mitigation rule requirements.”
“During the site visit, the resource agencies and the applicant’s representative noticed several streams that were not accounted for in the impacts tables. Please have the applicant incorporate the additional streams and revise the total amount of project impacts accordingly.”
“There are several impacts within the commercial district that appear to be unaccounted for or are unidentified. Please have the applicant revise the impacts table to account for all resources that will be converted.”
“Please have the applicant determine if project specific locations (PSLs) such as borrow, stockpiling, staging, and equipment parking areas associated with the project will impact wetlands. These PSL impacts should be included in the accounting of total project impacts.”
“Several wetlands within the proposed project boundary will be hydrologically disconnected from the current floodplain. Please have the applicant revise the impacts tables to include wetland and stream resources that will be affected secondarily by the proposed project and address the cumulative effect of each district on the interconnectedness of the onsite wetlands.”
“Please have the applicant explain in detail what measures will be taken to avoid groundwater and surface water contamination from construction activities.”
“Please have the applicant provide a hydraulic analysis of the site to account for current site conditions, projected increased impervious surface runoff, as well as drainage patterns for the site, and describe how water quality on and off the project site will be protected from impacts such as erosion.”
“Stormwater drainage from residential and commercial lots should be routed away from the West Fork San Jacinto River, the marina, and stream resources onsite. Stormwater should be redirected and routed to stormwater treatment features before entering the aforementioned resources. Please have the applicant provide details on how the replacement of lost onsite water quality functions will be addressed.”
Other Issues Outlined in Letter
How an expanded Woodland Hills Drive would affect stream crossings
The purpose and design of the so-called “water-quality ponds”
The design of channels and marinas; their connectivity to the San Jacinto; and their impact on water quality
The impact of boat channels on water-oxygen levels
Channels that cross wetland habitat
Box culverts instead of bridges
Channel widths (100-foot wide for a channel 4-feet deep)
Channels crossing property Romerica doesn’t own
Slope of channels
Diversion of stormwater from roads and parking lots away from channels
Dead-end channels
How domestic wastewater will be collected and treated
Dissolved oxygen monitoring and reporting
Applicants characterization of stream types (intermittent vs. perennial); requests “an accurate assessment.”
Conservation easements on the property. (21.90 acres of wetlands are covered by a conservation easement located within the residential and commercial portions of the proposed development. “Please have the applicant verify that the conservation easement will be protected from potential development and ensure the preserved wetlands will not be impacted, directly or indirectly, from the construction of the proposed project.”
Start Over?
There may be no good answers to some of these questions and concerns. SWCA, CivilTech and Romerica must be re-evaluating the impact of these questions on the economics of their project.
This isn’t the type of stuff you need another week to figure out. These questions will make the developers rethink their commitment to the entire project.
Finding answers will likely involve a redesign of the project and that could cost more than the land itself.
Keep in mind that water quality was just one of 20 different areas that the Corps is evaluating.
TCEQ Didn’t Have Enough Info to Make Decision
I asked Peter Schaefer, a team leader within the TCEQ Water Quality Assessment Section, whether the TCEQ had made a recommendation to the Corps on this project. He said “No.”
The reason: “Because TCEQ did not receive a response to our comment letter, and the applicant had not begun the process of working with us and the Corps to address the concerns raised in the letter, TCEQ was not in a position to make a decision on the project,” said Schaeffer. Hence the detailed requests for more information.
Schaefer added, “A typical 404/401 permitting process would normally take several months, if not a year or more, for the applicant to address comments from TCEQ, Corps, resource agencies, and the public. Because of the magnitude and nature of this project, it would likely have required much more time, coordination, discussion, project revision(s), and perhaps additional public notice(s) to get to the point where the Corps was prepared to complete a Decision Document.”
Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/1/2019
610 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Pieces-of-Romerica-Dev-e1546040851855.png?fit=1500%2C1095&ssl=110951500adminadmin2019-04-30 23:55:582019-05-01 00:04:00TCEQ Lists Water-Quality Concerns About Romerica High-Rise Permit
Artists rendering of several towers near the proposed marina with the Barrington in the background.
Romerica Could Not Meet Deadline
In a letter dated April 24, SWCA, Romerica’s environmental consultant, requested a “suspension” of the permit application. They said they needed more time to answer issues raised in 727 letters of protest. SWCA also said they would have to conduct additional surveys and field work requiring more than the 30 days allowed for them to respond. The official deadline for filing responses was April 27.
Withdrawal “Without Prejudice”
Instead of suspending the permit, the Corps “withdrew it without prejudice.” The Corps invited SWCA and Romerica to reapply at some future time when they had completed answers to the issues raised by concerned residents and environmental groups.
Leah Howard of Manlove Marketing and Communications, Romerica’s official point of contact for the application, was not available for comment at press time. However, a third party who talked to her earlier in the day said that their team wanted “to do a good and complete job with citizens’ questions, and that 30 days just wasn’t enough time.”
Another third party source quoted her as saying, “Due to Harvey, Romerica will complete several new studies and surveys for due diligence which will shed more light on the larger issue Lake Houston faces. After completion of the necessary work, Romerica and the USACE will reactivate the permit and more information will be provided at that time.”
Issues Still to Be Clarified
It is unclear at this time whether a new application would obligate Romerica to go through an additional public comment period. However the letter sent from the Corps to the developer states, “Resultant project modifications may require additional coordination.”
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Herons.jpg?fit=1500%2C2000&ssl=120001500adminadmin2019-04-30 15:31:532019-04-30 16:56:35High-Rise Permit Application Withdrawn by Corps
The Bayou Land Conservancy sent this letter today to the Committee Clerk of the House Environmental Regulation Committee. The Conservancy has allowed me to publish it:
On behalf of Bayou Land Conservancy, I urge you to vote FOR HB 909 when the Environmental Regulation Committee meets to consider this bill. Bayou Land Conservancy is a non-profit, community-supported land conservation organization that preserves land along streams for flood control, clean water, and wildlife. We preserve 14,000 acres in the Houston region, focused on the Lake Houston watershed. This includes the San Jacinto River, cited in 2006 as one of America’s most endangered rivers due to a number of threats, including the high intensity of local aggregate mining.
HB 909 would require the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to adopt and make accessible best management practices for aggregate producers to comply with applicable environmental laws and rules.
This adoption of best management practices would be an important, and needed, step to ensure that aggregate production in Texas is done with sensitivity to the environment and to community standards. As the population of Texas continues to grow, with the corresponding increase in construction of buildings, roads, and bridges, there is greater risk to the quality of life and safety for many communities located near mining operations.
As one of the nation’s leading aggregate producing states, we know Texas can lead in developing higher standards. We recommend best management practices that consider community values, such as:
Employ public notice and stakeholder process guidelines to ensure mining operations are in step with local priorities and concerns
Maintain setbacks or standards for siting operations away from sensitive areas or those with the highest likelihood to cause impacts
Develop environmental impact statements for proposed mining operations
Enact mitigation standards to reclaim the project area after facility closure
Utilize progressive reclamation with a step-be-step restoration of the site over time rather than waiting for final closure
Require the submission of an approved reclamation plan prior to permit approval
Require the certification of financial security to perform reclamation activities before permit approval
Require post-use conservation easements to ensure that the floodplain is left undeveloped and can provide a community amenity opportunity.
There is urgency for Texas to lead by enacting commonsense solutions that protect the community.
Without development and implementation of best management practices, such as those outlined above that would keep sediment in place through floodplain preservation and mine reclamation, downstream communities will continue to be at risk of water quality degradation and flooding.
Please vote YES on HB 909.
(Signed) Jill Boullion Executive Director
Please Support HB 909; Here’s How
Call. Write. Or testify in person TODAY. The committee meets to consider this bill tomorrow. The following representatives comprise the Environmental Regulation committee.
Rep. J. M. Lozano (512) 463-0463
Rep. Ed Thompson (512) 463-0707
Rep. César Blanco (512) 463-0622
Rep. Kyle J. Kacal (512) 463-0412
Rep. John Kuempel (512) 463-0602
Rep. Geanie W. Morrison (512) 463-0456
Rep. Ron Reynolds (512) 463-0494
Rep. John Turner (512) 463-0576
Rep. Erin Zwiener (512) 463-0647
Committee Clerk: Scott Crownover. (512) 463-0776
If you can come to Austin to testify, please do. The meeting will be held Wednesday, May 1, in room E1.026 of the Capitol Building. Most likely hearing time is in the evening around 8 p.m., but get I plan to get there early. Hope to see you there.
Posted by Bob Rehak on April 30, 2019
609 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/capitolc_1024.jpg?fit=1024%2C768&ssl=17681024adminadmin2019-04-30 10:12:192019-04-30 10:15:35Bayou Land Conservancy Supports HB 909, Publishing Best Practices for Sand Mining
Wednesday, May 1, 2019, the Texas House of Representatives Environmental Affairs Committee will hear testimony on HB 909. It would require the TCEQ to establish and publish best management practices for sand mining.
Why We Need HB 909
After Harvey, I discovered bright white trails of sand leading from sand mines upstream to massive sediment buildups in the Humble/Kingwood area. The Army Corps later acknowledged that some of our flooding was likely attributable to these massive sediment dams. No doubt some of the sand came from channel erosion, too. But we can’t do much to control that. We can, however, help reduce sediment from man-made sources with sensible regulations found in many other states, including those growing faster than Texas.
Texas is the only state that does not mandate minimum setbacks from rivers for sand mines. As a result, virtually all mines in this area are built inside floodways of major rivers where floods can wash sediment downstream.
Establish performance bonds to cover the cost of cleanup
Giant sand dunes deposited during Harvey exacerbate flooding by constraining the conveyance of downstream drainage ditches and the San Jacinto river. Mining exposes downstream populations to heightened flood risk and reduces their property values. Performance bonds could ensure cleanup and repairs after floods in a timely way and force those who caused damage to bear the cost of remediation.
Increase the width of dikes
Texas has no minimum setbacks from rivers and does not recognize erosion hazard zones. Some mines operate so close to the river that floodwaters breach their dikes repeatedly. Wider dikes:
Make stronger dikes that are less likely to fail and that improve safety.
If forested, can slow currents as they enter and leave mines.
Reduce the amount of sediment picked up and carried downstream.
Reduce the danger of river capture due to river migration.
River is migrating toward pit in background at the rate of 12 feet per year, in part, due to lack of vegetation protecting banks.
Decrease the slope of dikes
Other states and countries recommend gently sloping dikes to help grow vegetation, which reduces erosion. The near-vertical slope of many dikes on the San Jacinto can’t sustain vegetation.
Steep, loose dikes with no vegetation breach easily during floods.
Reduce erosion with vegetation
Planting dikes and unmined surfaces with grass and/or native trees can bind the soil, slow floodwater, reduce erosion, trap sand, and help retain sand within mine boundaries.
Virtually all states and countries recommend planting native grasses and trees to help bind soil. Revegetating after plants have been removed can take years. Therefore, the best, cheapest and simplest practice is to leave native vegetation in place when constructing mines.
Replant areas not actively being mined
Loose sand, exposed to floodwaters, exposes downstream communities to unnecessary risk. Replanting with native grasses and trees can bind soil, reduce water velocity during floods and reduce erosion. TCEQ reports that native grasses are 98% effective in reducing erosion. Keeping soil in place is the best way to keep it out of rivers.
Avoid clearing areas that will not soon be mined.
Delay clearing land until the last possible moment to reduce erosion risk from floodwaters. A large part of a sand mine on the East Fork was cleared, then went through three so-called “500-year storms” in the next three years – before any mining took place.
This land was cleared just before consecutive 500-year floods in 2015, 2016 and 2017. Downstream communities like Kingwood paid the price. It still has not been mined. 30 acres of wetlands downstream from the mine above were covered by sand dunes up to 10 feet tall.
Before Harvey, this stockpile covered 34 acres and was up to 100 feet tall. It is located at the confluence of not one, but two floodways, just upstream from the wetlands shown above.
Establish performance bonds to guarantee remediation of breaches and repurposing of mined areas once mining is complete.
Satellite images show dike breaches that have remained open 3 to 6 years. Even worse, obtaining a permit to mine in Texas requires a remediation plan, but it does not obligate mines to act on that plan when mining is complete. That creates safety hazards, eyesores, and economic development headaches for communities.
Gaping Holes in Regs Exposed by Harvey
Harvey exposed gaping holes in Texas regulations. It underscored the importance of adopting better practices to help improve public safety, reduce damage to infrastructure, and avoid widespread flood damage to homes and businesses. Consequences of ignoring these recommendations potentially include:
Destruction of downstream communities through increased flooding
Illegal “taking” of private property
More loss of life
Unfair imposition of remediation costs on taxpayers
Hidden “subsidies” that distort the true cost of cement and its usage
Loss of faith in the ethical standards of businesses and the free enterprise system
Loss of faith in government institutions to protect people and property
Loss of home and business values
Reduction of property tax income to city and county governments
Making Texas a less desirable place to live.
Destruction like we experienced during Harvey is rarely caused by one thing. Multiple failures on multiple levels compounded each other. To the extent that sand mines contributed to the problem, they can help solve it by modifying business practices as described above.
Please Help
Texas has no simple, easy-to-read recommendations like Louisiana and other states. The few references to best management practices currently on the TCEQ web site have to do with a water-quality district on the Brazos. They do not apply to the San Jacinto.
Please support this legislation. Phone members of the House Environmental Regulation Committee.
Rep. J. M. Lozano (512) 463-0463
Rep. Ed Thompson (512) 463-0707
Rep. César Blanco (512) 463-0622
Rep. Kyle J. Kacal (512) 463-0412
Rep. John Kuempel (512) 463-0602
Rep. Geanie W. Morrison (512) 463-0456
Rep. Ron Reynolds (512) 463-0494
Rep. John Turner (512) 463-0576
Rep. Erin Zwiener (512) 463-0647
If you can come to Austin to testify, please do. The meeting will be in room E1.026 of the Capitol Building. Most likely hearing time is in the evening around 8 p.m., but I plan to get there early. Hope to see you there.
Posted by Bob Rehak on April 29, 2019
608 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/StockpileErosion.jpg?fit=1500%2C911&ssl=19111500adminadmin2019-04-29 17:18:012019-04-29 19:49:42House Environmental Regulation Committee to Hear Testimony on Sand Mining Best Practices
