Tax Bill Inequity: How You Make Up for Sand Miners

‘Tis the season…for tax bills. As I paid mine this weekend, I reflected on how Montgomery County’s under-appraisals of sand mines resulted in over-taxation of other properties there and elsewhere. Here’s how.

Lone Star College System Provides Basis for Comparson

The Lone Star College System taxes property in several counties including Montgomery and surrounding counties. That includes northern Harris County. Lone Star’s tax rate is identical in each: 0.107800. However, because Montgomery County consistently under-values sand-mine properties, other property owners there and in surrounding counties must pay more than their fare share of Lone Star taxes to balance Lone Star’s budget.

In September, I ran a series of posts focused on sand mine appraisals in Montgomery County. The first examined the sand mine on the East Fork. The second examined multiple sand mines on the West Fork. The third talked about how Montgomery County consistently under-classified the use of sand-mine land. Of the 53 different parcels of land sampled, not one was classified as a sand mine.

Montgomery County classified:

  • 16 parcels as “Timber” even though there was no or little timber on them and the land was clearly being used for sand mining.
  • 31 parcels as “Vacant” despite mining operations on the property.

To be fair, miners had not yet timbered parts of several parcels intended for expansion.

The Timber Dividend in Sand Mines

I started digging back into the sand-mine property tax bills to see how much of a break these big businesses were getting compared to me.

One 10-acre parcel owned by Guniganti Family Property Holdings on the East Fork (see below) received a timber exemption even though there’s scarcely a tree on the property and the land hasn’t been in timber for years. It clearly doesn’t meet the qualifications for the timber exemption as outlined by the Texas State Comptroller. The official that I talked to in the Montgomery County Appraisal District office agreed.

Montgomery County Parcel R53336, part of the Guniganti mine on the East Fork. Tax due to the Lone Star College system equals $10.78 for all ten acres thanks to a timber exemption. The 10 acres is inside the aqua-colored line.

 

Guniganti LSC tax bill for ten acres above shows $10.78 total for ten acres thanks to the timber exemption.

On those 10-acres, the Guniganti’s paid a total of $10.78 in tax to the Lone Star College System or $1.08 per acre. By comparison, I paid $338 to Lone Star for my one-acre residential lot in northern Harris County. That means, the Guniganti’s paid 313 times less per acre for their income producing property. And they own more than 1700 additional acres of land with the timber exemption.

Another example: Edward Boettcher Jr. from Brenham owns one sixth of a 367-acre parcel on the West Fork also used for sand mining. He received a timber exemption on his property which reduced the LSC taxable value by 96%. That meant he paid a total of $11.28 to the Lone Star College District for his 61-acre share of the income-producing property. He paid $0.18/acre – 1878 times less than I paid. 

Boettcher will pay only $11.28 to LSC on his share of one-sixth share of 367 acres.

Vacant Land That’s Not

And what about that land classified as “Vacant”?  RGI Materials owes Lone Star $296.27 on 134.6 acres of land, or $2.20/acre – 154 times less than I paid as an individual on non-income producing land.

RGI did NOT have a timber exemption so they paid $296.27 to LSC in taxes on 135 acres classified as vacant.

Inconsistencies Abound

The 53 different parcels of land examined in September received 10 different types of classifications even though they were all being used for the same purpose – sand mining. Only one parcel was classified as commercial and only two were classified as industrial. The vast majority were classified as vacant rural land or timberland. After calling these inconsistencies to the attention of the Montgomery County Appraisal District almost two months ago, it appears that little or nothing has changed. Spot checks failed to turn up any reclassifications. Vast differences and inconsistencies remain…even among sand mines.

By the way, the state comptroller’s office says, and I quote, “Sand mines should be classified as sand mines.” That means they should be valued according to their income producing potential. It doesn’t appear that Montgomery County appraises them that way; the values rarely change from year to year – not what you would expect from depleting assets.

Season for Sharing

Yes, ’tis the season for sharing. And those generous sand miners are sharing their tax obligation with you through dubious exemptions, mis-classifications, and valuations that have nothing to do with the income-producing value of the land.

Someone has to make up the difference in the Lone Star College System budget and luckily (for the sand miners), that’s you and me.

These appraisals and tax bills illustrate how we’re all connected. It also underscores the need for consistent appraisals and state oversight of appraisal districts.

Luckily for residents of Harris County, only the Lone Star College portion of tax bills is affected. Residents of Montgomery County, however, take the full hit; all portions of those tax bills are affected.

These are my opinions on matters of public policy, protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the great State of Texas.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/18/2018

447 Days since Hurricane Harvey

PS: I should add that the Lone Star College System has nothing to do with appraisals or exemptions.

 

The Great Escape: Rebecca Johansen’s Hurricane Harvey Experience

Rebecca Johansen is a Kingwood-based CPA, specializing in taxes. Before Hurricane Harvey, using technology and remote capabilities, she was able to work primarily from her home in the Enclave. Almost 15 months later, she’s finally back in her home, but “scared to death” of the possibility of another flood. Her journey since Harvey has been a remarkable blend of heroism and humility. The only constants in her life have been stress, Lysol and sleep deprivation. Now, at age 62, her main goals in life are simply to enjoy the holidays with her family and not see a waterline on her walls. This is the sixth in a series of interviews with Harvey survivors.

Rebecca Johansen today in her kitchen, remodeled for the second time in two years. Her elderly neighbor, Jean, perched on the granite countertop during Harvey, waiting for rescuers.

Rehak: Tell me about the night of the flood.

Johansen: I owned a small generator. I remembered being without electricity during Ike for two weeks and didn’t want to go through that again. I didn’t think we would flood, but I was certain we would lose power.

Helping Elderly Neighbor

After I got my generator started, I went over to my neighbor’s house. She was 85 at the time. Her name is Jean. I said, “Come on. You’re spending the night at my house.” She refused at first, but I didn’t want her to be there by herself in the dark, especially if we flooded. She had almost drowned as a young girl and was deathly afraid of water, so we packed her medications and a change of clothes. I set her up in a spare room with a little lamp and a TV. About 10 p.m., Jean went to sleep.

Shortly after that, things started to go downhill. We started getting water in the garage, so I had to turn off the generator. Then, it was pitch black. I thought we would just get an inch or two, so I started putting stuff up on tables.

Calls for Help Go Unanswered

It was kind of hard to do in the dark. Then about 2 o’clock in the morning, water started coming in the house, too. After a while, I figured I had to get Jean someplace safer, so I put her on my kitchen counter. I told her that as soon as daybreak came, I would try to get us help. But the water was coming up pretty fast. I called 911, but I couldn’t get through.

Desperate Attempts to Attract Rescuers

When daybreak finally came, the water was coming up and up and up. I went out into the street because I could hear helicopters. But we have so many trees. They couldn’t see me. Eventually the water in the street was up to here (gesturing to her chest).

I tried crawling up on the brick wall between our houses, anything to be seen. No luck. I kept going out to find help and back in to check Jean. This went on for a while.

Eventually I made my way down the street, waving a white shirt. Finally, a helicopter saw me. They looped around and lowered a man down on a cable.

I was so worried about Jean. At one point, I went back in to check on her and she saw one of my shoes float by. She said, “Rebecca, I always did like those shoes.” We both laughed.

Rehak: You were rescued by helicopter?

Evacuation and Search for Remaining Residents

Johansen: No, he called for a boat. I can’t say enough about how professional everyone was. He was so kind. Jean was stressed. He reassured her. He said, “Everything’s going to be OK.” Then he took her up in his arms. By that time, a Coast Guard woman had come in and the two of them got her in the boat. They were just stellar.

They asked me if I knew who else on the street needed to be rescued. Then I told them about another neighbor. They went to her house and banged on the front door, but no one answered. They came back and said, “No one’s home, so we’re moving on.” I said, “I can’t believe that she isn’t there. She wouldn’t just leave the two of us here if rescuers came.”

Rescuing More Neighbors

We were about to leave. They had called another boat in to help a lady across the street. Our boat just idled for a minute to make sure they didn’t need assistance when I saw my other neighbor waving in the front window. I said “She’s there! We gotta go back.” So they went back and came out with this large suitcase. Presumably, she had been in the back of her house packing some things when they first knocked and didn’t hear them. She followed them out with another bag and a cat in one of those cat things. Then we left by boat.

“Wearing” Debris on Long, Wet Boat Ride

I had debris all in my hair and clothes. The debris that came through there was just unbelievable.

Rehak: Give me some examples.  Woody?

Johansen: That kind of stuff, plus trash. I didn’t even realize at the time that the floating debris had injured me. You’re just in “fight or flight” mode. This whole arm was black and blue. It looked like someone had just beat me.

Chemical storage tank that washed up in Rebecca Johansen’s yard during Harvey.Note mud line on wall relative to the height of the people on the right.

So, they get her in the boat. We pull out. We’re on our way across Kingwood Drive, through the H-E-B parking lot, It’s pouring rain. They dropped us off by the Park ‘n Ride. We had to walk a fair distance to where you could get a ride.

Volunteers Help Transfer to Creekwood Middle School

Finally, a very nice man with his wife and daughter took us over to Creekwood Middle School in their pickup.

Rehak: Did Creekwood stay dry throughout the ordeal?

Johansen: Yes, but there was no power. Jean has compromised lungs, so I was very worried about her. She got soaked.

I said, “Jean, we have to get you into some dry clothes.” So, we go in the ladies’ room. I had a little flash light. It took her about 20 minutes to change into dry clothes, then I changed. My clothes weren’t dry, but at least they didn’t have twigs in them.

At Creekwood, the community response was overwhelming. Drinks. Water. Snacks. Clothing. Shoes. People brought food and everything you could imagine. It was amazing how quickly people responded. Just amazing.

So Bruised, Doctor Suspected “I was Battered Wife”

The next day I got an infection. Of course, I’d lost my car, so I got a ride to a clinic. I told the doctor I was there for an infection and he looked at me like I was crazy. I think he thought I was a battered wife.  He said, “What in the wide world happened to you?” It was from all the flood debris bumping into me.

Rehak: How long were you in Creekwood?

Johansen: Not long. Jean’s son-in-law and daughter live in Kingwood Lakes. She has another daughter who lives in Atascocita. They were frantic, just beside themselves, worried about Jean. I let them know that she was OK and that I had her at Creekwood. They had flooded too, but had some friends pick us up. Thank God, we didn’t have to worry about that, too!

Sheltered by Strangers

For the first few days, we all stayed with the friends. I didn’t know them, but Jean said, “Stay with me.” She wanted us to be together, so I stayed four or five days, then found somewhere else.

(Johansen chokes up at this point.)

Rehak: How long did it take you to get back to your house after the flood?

Johansen: The water came up fast and went down fast. We got rescued sometime during the morning. Then a couple of days went by. I guess it was on the third day that I got to my house.

The water had drained out. It was just mud, gunk, and a couple of dead fish. It’s amazing how 40 inches of water can move things around your house. The refrigerator turned over. Furniture scattered everywhere. The garage doors buckled from water pushing against them. It was the worst sight you can imagine.

No Warnings to Evacuate

Rehak: Did you get any warnings to evacuate?

Johansen: No.

Rehak: Did you know that they were releasing water from the dam?

Johansen: No. I figured they would have to release something, but nothing like what they released. I was more worried about the power outage than the flood.

Rehak: When you first sensed that water was coming in the house, was it already too late to get your car and evacuate?

Johansen: Yes. No one could get out. Before nightfall, Kingwood Drive was already blocked off.

To not start the dam release earlier and issue proper warnings…someone really dropped the ball. That’s my personal feeling. A week before, we all knew that this storm was going to move slowly and drop a lot of rain, so I’m at a loss as to why there wasn’t an earlier release.

Battling Inexperienced Insurance Adjuster

Rehak: Did you have flood insurance?

Any place can flood. The drain on your street could get plugged with debris and you would flood. I never thought I’d need it, but yes, I had it. Thank God.

Rehak: Did you battle with adjusters and contractors?

Johansen: I think my first adjuster had never done any adjusting before. She was terrible. I ended up being a squeaky wheel. I couldn’t even get her out to the property. Eventually I got through to somebody. My insurance agent, called me. He said, “Rebecca, I don’t know whose cage you rattled, but they are going to call you and offer another adjuster. I got a call within the hour. He showed up at 8 a.m. the next morning.

At that point, I was still pretty sleep deprived. I forgot to discuss some things. So I called him back the next morning. He said, he would proceed quickly and not to worry. After three and a half weeks of hell with the first adjuster, this guy got it done in two days. I guess my perseverance paid off.

Everything was a battle at that time. You have to get a contractor. File insurance claims. Buy a new car. Find a place to live. Fight for attention with millions of other people! All at once.

Lucking Out with Great Contractor

Luckily, I had a great contractor, Randy White, owner of Superior Home Renovations. He had done my kitchen the year before. Unfortunately! (We chuckle at her joke, i.e., how she got to replace her kitchen twice in one year.)

Randy is a very good man. He’s local. He does excellent work. He’s honest. And right after the flood, he showed up to check on me to see if I was OK. Randy White was a godsend. I like him personally and I would recommend him to anyone. He’s been there for me through this whole thing.

Rehak: How long did it take him to get all the work done?

Johansen: Until mid-June. They’re still working on some things. Like I just got the exterior painted last week. But the house is basically complete. They’re just finishing punch-list items. I’m so grateful that I have Randy.

Jean Gets Back in Her Home

Rehak: What happened to Jean?

Johansen: Jean wanted to get back in her house. Kyle and Charlie Campbell, her daughter and son-in-law found a contractor for her. They hadn’t even started on their own house by the time they got Jean back in hers. Right after the flood, she was very ill with pneumonia and was hospitalized. She had a rough time, so she was everyone’s focus.

Kyle and Charlie are now working on their house in Kingwood Lakes while living with Jean.

Enclave Still the Place to Be

Rehak: Tell me about the Enclave.

Johansen: You know before the flood, people were clamoring to get into that neighborhood. Location. Location. Location. Houses were selling quickly … especially if they had updates. Everybody wanted to live in the Enclave. It skewed to retired people because it’s one story, small yards, that kind of thing. But there’s a mixture of people. The location is wonderful; there’s so much that’s walkable. You could live your life and not go much more than a mile in any direction.

I love it; I intend to live the rest of my life there as long as I’m healthy enough. But if I go through another flood again, I won’t rebuild.

Single and Senior: How She Did It

Rehak: You’re single?

Johansen: Yes.

Rehak: That makes it harder.

Johansen: Yep. No back up. Everything is on your shoulders. My livelihood. Everything.

Rehak: How did you do it?

Johansen: “One hour at a time. Also, I ended up staying with a friend who was also a client. Her husband passed away about four years ago. She travels a lot. She doesn’t have any children. And she’s super nice. She said to me, “Rebecca, I’m gone quite a bit. Why don’t you stay at my house? It’s quiet.” She lives in Sand Creek. So I stayed there and am grateful for all that she did for me. I was working seven days a week. You don’t ever do it all by yourself. People help. I was lucky to have my son, daughter, family, and so many friends and colleagues who reached out to help me. I can’t thank them enough.

Best Way to Help: “Just Show Up”

Rehak: Tell me about the help you got.

Johansen: This whole thing taught me something. If something really bad happens, and I am in a position to help, I’m not going to call and say, “What can I do to help?” I’m just going to show up. That’s what you do. You just show up. You look around and you start doing things. The people that did that for me were so special. I will be forever grateful.

Rehak: Before the flood, you worked primarily at home. Did you lose a lot of records?

Johansen: Yes. A lot of equipment was destroyed along with most of my physical files. Luckily, my main computer, laptop and backup hard drive survived.

Ensuring Flooded Files Were Destroyed Properly

Rehak: What did you do with all the files that flooded?

Johansen: That was one of the most stressful parts of the flood. I had fourteen 4-drawer file cabinets locked up in my garage and several inside. Each flooded except for the top drawer. I had to figure out how to destroy all the flooded records. No one would take them wet and you can’t just have somebody haul off records like that. I had to find a safe way to dispose of them.

I pulled all the drawers out and ServePro built a tent over them in the garage. Dehumidifiers and fans ran under the tent for four and a half weeks. When I took the tent off, I found the paper had expanded so much, it buckled the drawers. I couldn’t get anything out!

So one Sunday, we loaded all the drawers up in trucks and drove them a hundred miles north of Houston to some private property. With a hammer, I beat all those file drawers apart and got the files out.

Then we poured diesel fuel over them. It was hard to get them to burn at first. But eventually, they did. It took all day. I got back very late that night.

Late-Night Resurrection of Crucial Files

Once I got that off my plate, there were some files we had to resurrect. They went back under the tent for another week. They came out gnarly looking, let me tell you. Mud and gunk everywhere. When they were all dry, I sprayed them with Lysol and once that dried, I boxed them. Every day, I was up at my new office location till all hours peeling papers, making copies, shredding and reconstructing. A friend called me in December and said, “OK, what letter of the alphabet are you up to now?”

I was working at that seven days a week, 10 to 12 hours a day, just trying to get back to where I could function.

Rehak: Will you ever go back to working at home?

Johansen: The thought of going through that again just scares me to death. I can’t do it.

“I Know This Has Changed Me”

Rehak: What do you want your future to be? (I catch her off guard. There’s a LOOOOOONG pause.)

Johansen: You know I’ve been in recovery mode so long, I’ve just started to think about that.

I want to have a little family reunion with my son and daughter up near Seattle. We’ve arranged a trip to a little Bavarian town in the Cascades called Leavenworth. I just want to be with my kids. (Choking up again.) It’s kind of hard to talk about. I know this has changed me.

Rehak: How so?

Johansen: Well, it’s definitely taken a physical toll. I’ve started to think about what I want to do with the rest of my life and how I want to live it, because all you have is today.  Things can change just like that (snapping fingers).

I’d also like to have a little bit of peaceful time back in my house and not see the water line on the wall.

Rehak: (Joking) Gee, you want it all!

Johansen: (Laughs)

 

Posted by Bob Rehak on November 15, 2018

443 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Whose Property Rights are More Important? Yours or Sand Miners’?

In the next two months, I expect to see legislation filed that will strengthen regulations on sand mining. Hopefully, legislation will prevent dangerous practices by the mining industry that have put residents at risk in the past.

Perhaps we can compromise on legislation that lets miners exercise their property rights without harming the property rights of others…or their incomes, safety, and families.

This is another post designed to raise awareness of sand mining problems and how other states have solved them. One of the main problems with sand mining in Texas: virtually all miners locate their mines in floodways. That almost guarantees a phenomenon called pit (or river) capture. Washington State has discovered the following about pit capture.

Causes of Pit Capture

Sand-pit capture happens when pressure from floodwater breaks through dikes and takes a short cut across sand mines instead of following the river’s course. A scientific paper called “Flood Plains, Salmon Habitat, and Sand and Gravel Mining” by David Norman and C. Jeff Cederholm describes the process.  The paper, published in Washington Geology by their Department of Natural Resources, says pit capture is almost inevitable in the long term.

“Regardless of the best planning and intentions, impacts of flood-plain mining may simply be delayed until the river is captured by the … pit,” they say. “While capture may not occur in the next 100-year flood event, it is likely to occur in the future as development and consequent flood magnitude increase. In the long term, stream capture by (sand and) gravel pits is a near certainty.”

Consequences of Pit Capture

The paper cites more than three dozen examples of pit capture. Consequences include:

  • Lowering the river bed upstream and downstream of mining operations
  • River bed erosion and (or) channel incision
  • Bank erosion and collapse
  • Undercutting of levees, roads, bridge supports, pipelines, utility towers and other structures
  • Increasing suspended sediment
  • Deposition of silts

I have described how those consequences happen in several previous posts. Also, the paper describes the processes in detail, so I will not repeat the explanations here.

As in Washington, the Houston area has had many instances of sand-mine pit-capture.

Video Shows Simulation of Pit Capture

This short YouTube video may help you visualize how this process works. A company called Little River made it with funding from the EPA and State of Missouri. Little River specializes in table-top, tank experiments for science classes. This video shows  how pit capture happens and how erosion results.

Depending on the area and depth of the pit, and sediment volume carried by the river, it could take “millennia” to restore the natural environment after pit capture.

Operators’ attempts to prevent pit/river capture by armoring dikes and channelizing rivers often accelerate floodwaters and increase erosion downstream, say the authors (page 13 and figure 17) .

Cures for Pit Capture

The Washington State Department of Ecology Shoreline Management Handbook recommends locating mining activities “outside the shoreline jurisdiction.” They recommend 200 ft. from the floodway or off the 100-year flood plain. The latter coresponds to Texas regulations for the John Graves Scenic Riverway District on the Brazos River.

Immediate Reclamation for Each Segment

The Washington State Department of Natural Resources administers their Surface Mine Reclamation Act (RCW 78.44). It generally requires reclaiming mines immediately after each segment is mined. The 1993 revision of this law requires that most mines in flood-plain environments be reclaimed as beneficial wetlands.

Avoiding pit capture requires thorough and immediate reclamation because of river migration. The longer a pit goes before reclamation, the greater the likelihood that river migration will capture it. We saw an example of that on the San Jacinto. The river is migrating 12 feet per year and is 38 feet away from breaking into a major sand pit.

The immediate reclamation requirement could benefit Texans. Texas law requires sand miners to file a reclamation plan to obtain a permit. However, there is no requirement to execute the plan before leaving the property. Many simply walk away from their obligations, much to the detriment of surrounding property owners and the safety of the public. Requiring miners to reclaim one section of a mine before permitting another would give them a powerful incentive to reclaim land.

Substitution of crushed concrete or quarry rock for gravel also has distinct environmental advantages.

Safeguards for Flood-Plain Mining if Necessary

The authors conclude: “If mine plans call for sites on flood plains, then wide, topographically higher, and thickly vegetated buffers should be considered as a means of reducing the probability of river avulsion in the near term. However, in most instances, buffers only delay the inevitable.:

“Determining an adequate distance between the flood-plain mine pit lake and the river will depend on understanding the rate of river meandering and the risk of avulsion.”

As always, these are my opinions on matters of public policy. They are protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statutes of the Great State of Texas.

Posted by Bob Rehak on August 13, 2018

441 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Attention Homes Still Under Repair: Freeze Watch Tuesday Night into Wednesday

Harris County has issued a freeze watch. Temperatures for Tuesday night into Wednesday should dip into the high twenties or low thirties. That normally wouldn’t be a problem for most well-insulated homes. But some are still under repair and may be missing attic or wall insulation. And some folks still living out of campers in their driveways may have heat in their homes turned off to save money. So here is a gentle reminder.  Not all floods come from the ground up. Some come fr0m the attic down.

You may want to drain your pipes or let your faucets drip if:

  • Your water is still running, but…
  • Your pipes are not insulated or your home is not heated.

Remember, hot water pipes freeze before cold. Scientists since Aristotle have observed this phenomenon. It’s called the Mpemba effect. No one can say why this happens with certainty. But it’s more important to let hot water drip than cold.

Posted by Bob Rehak on November 12, 2018

440 Days since Hurricane Harvey

How fast are we replacing forests and wetlands with concrete?

We all know that concrete is impervious and that it increases both the amount and speed of runoff, which contributes to flooding. But how fast are we losing wetlands, forest and prairie to development? Does anyone really know? The folks at the Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC) in The Woodlands have attempted to quantify the answer.

You can see their findings in a presentation called Houston-Galveston & Southeast Texas Land Cover Change. This interactive presentation/tool allows you to zoom into individual watersheds or examine data regionally.

“Green infrastructure such as forests, prairies, and wetlands,” they say, “can capture and slow the release of rainfall. When preserved and integrated with engineered retention systems, this can help alleviate runoff issues.”

Concrete Details from Montgomery and Northern Harris Counties

The presentation consists of a series of interactive maps that lets you explore the world immediately around you. It begins with measurements of the extent of “imperviousness.” Then it goes into a series of maps that show the rate of change in the amount of upland forests, wetlands and developed areas over the last 20 years throughout the region and state. Below, some examples from the Lake Houston/Montgomery County Area.

In 2001, the Lake Houston Area was 10-20% impervious. Most of Montgomery County was less than 10. Compare this to…

By 2011, imperviousness in the Lake Houston area had not changed much. But look at the large finger extending up into Montgomery County along the San Jacinto West Fork.

This map shows the loss of wetlands between 1996 and 2010. The deep orange color shows the greatest loss of wetlands. Note the dramatic changes upstream of Lake Houston along the West Fork, Spring Creek and Cypress Creek. The East Fork, Peach Creek and Caney Creek watersheds show loss also.

This map shows loss of forests upstream of Lake Houston between 1996 and 2010. Again, the deep orange color shows the greatest loss. Note the similar pattern to loss of wetlands. According to the US Forest Service, a single large tree can soak up 100 gallons of water a day.

HARC ends with a discussion of future development by showing the Montgomery County Thoroughfare Plan (circa 2016) and how it would impact important eco-systems.

The Montgomery County Thoroughfare Plan as of 2016. The orange areas show planned additions. Note the density of additions in the Spring, Porter, New Caney and Splendora areas.

Montgomery County is the second fastest growing county in the region (3% per year) after Fort Bend County (3.1%).

Unchecked Upstream Development can Cause Downstream Flooding

HARC’s data underscores the need for a regional approach to watershed development and the strict enforcement of flood plain regulations. We need look no farther than the west side of Houston, in areas like Meyerland and Bellaire, to see the impact of encroachment on flood plains.

Posted by Bob Rehak on November 11, 2018

439 Days since Hurricane Harvey

 

 

Houston Advanced Research Center Pre-/Post Harvey Mapping Tool

A novel GIS mapping tool developed by the Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC) now makes it easy to see how Hurricane Harvey changed the San Jacinto River.

This novel, 4-pane mapping tool allows users to view pre- and post- Hurricane Harvey images in natural and infrared colors.

The four panels make it very helpful when looking at how river and stream channels changed before and after the storm. Zooming and scrolling in the upper-left pane automatically zooms and scrolls the other panes to match, so all four images remain in perfect register.

Hurricane Harvey brought more than 50 inches of rain in a single week to a region that normally receives 45 inches of rainfall in a year. This amount of rainfall in such a short period of time brought widespread flooding and destruction of property throughout the Houston-Galveston region. This mapping tool lets you easily see it.

The natural color images make it easy to see changes in the river. The infrared images make it easy to see changes in vegetation. This link provides an overview of how to interpret the colors in infrared images.

Seven Areas of Interest

Here are several striking images that jumped out at me as I scrolled around the Humble/Kingwood Area.

Note how the channel under the US59 Bridge seems to have shifted north.

Note the massive sand deposition along the banks of the river between 59 and Forest Cove.

Note the huge extension of the sand bar that blocked the drainage ditch coming out of River Grove Park.

Note the massive enlargement of the mouth bar between Kings Point and Atascocita Point.

Note the enlargement of the sand bars blocking the East Fork at East End Park.

Note the destruction in Forest Cove along Marina Drive.

Note the blockage in the river south of Kingwood County Club that altered the entire channel.

Explore for Yourself

Explore other areas, perhaps closer to your home, by visiting this link: Effects of Hurricane Harvey: Pre & Post Regional Aerial Imagery.

The before imagery has resolution down to one meter. The after imagery has resolution down to one foot.  What does that mean? If you left a shoe in your driveway when the plane was flying over, you could see it in the image.

My only wish is that the site had a ruler tool for measuring distance. But overall, this is an outstanding and valuable tool.

HARC is a research hub providing independent analysis on energy, air, and water issues to people seeking scientific answers. They are focused on “building a sustainable future that helps people thrive and nature flourish.”

Posted on November 10, 2018

438 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Why We Need Full-Cost Accounting for Aggregate Mining

Last night, I read a strangely moving 125-page white paper titled Freshwater Gravel Mining and Dredging Issues. It was authored by G. Mathias Kondolf, Matt Smeltzer and Lisa Kimball of UC Berkeley for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and Washington Department of Transportation in 2001. Despite “Gravel” in the name, the paper is an encyclopedic review of the scientific literature that surrounds both sand and gravel mining in all of their various forms (river, flood plain, wet, dry, bar scalping, in-stream sand traps, etc.).

It’s a virtual primer on how aggregate mining affects rivers, infrastructure, the water table, people and the environment. The study argues that many of the impacts of sand and gravel mining are never reflected in the cost of the products because government, in effect, subsidizes them. The authors also argue that if the full costs of mining were reflected in the price of aggregate, that we might be producing it in ways that were safer.

About the Author(s) and Focus

The lead author, Kondolf, is Professor of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning at Berkeley. He specializes in hydrology, environmental geology, environmental impact assessment, and riparian zone management with an emphasis on stream channel processes as they relate to natural resource management. Kondolf’s research is widely cited in scientific literature concerning sand and gravel mining.

While a large part of this white paper discusses aggregate mining’s impacts on salmon, it also addresses issues related directly to humans.

Sources for Aggregate and Their Cost

“Sand and gravel deposited by fluvial processes are used as construction aggregate for roads and highways (base material and asphalt), pipelines (bedding), septic systems (drain rock in leach fields), and concrete (aggregate mix) for highways and buildings.

Page 21 discusses two primary sources of construction aggregate. In many areas, aggregate is derived primarily from alluvial deposits, either from pits in river floodplains and terraces, or by in-channel (instream) mining, removing sand and gravel directly from river beds with heavy equipment.” The primary type of mining done in the Houston area is floodplain mining. However, the industry is beginning to push mining in rivers as a way to reduce excess sedimentation. (Ironically, many governments see floodplain mining as the answer to the dangers of river mining.)

Pages 22 and 23 discuss another novel source: reservoir deltas (much like the West Fork of the San Jacinto between US59 and FM1960). “Extraction of reservoir deposits serves to restore some (albeit a small fraction) of the reservoir capacity lost to sedimentation.” However, in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, the cost of building new reservoirs in California was approximately $3,000/acre foot, while the cost of mechanically removing sediment from old reservoirs was $20,000/acre foot, almost 7X more.

“The economic value of avoiding further reservoir capacity loss could be a significant factor making removal more economically attractive in the future, especially if the environmental costs of instream and floodplain mining become better recognized and reflected in the prices of those aggregates.”

Kondolf, et al. also discuss other potential sources of aggregate such as recycled concrete. “Recycling concrete rubble not only avoids environmental impacts of new aggregate production, but avoids impacts of disposing the rubble as well.” Further, they found that the quality of recycled concrete could meet half of current aggregate uses.

Abandoned concrete crushing facility on North Houston Avenue in Humble.

Dangers Associated with Floodplain Mining

“As in-channel mining is increasingly discouraged or prohibited, mining of floodplain pits is encouraged as a less damaging alternative,” say the authors. However, there is no shortage of dangers associated with floodplain mining. The authors catalog those.

Where mines intersect the water table, dangers include:

  • Lowering of alluvial water table
  • Loss of wells
  • Loss of riparian vegetation
  • Prevention of seedlings from establishing
  • Die-off of trees
  • Reduced summer base flow in rivers
  • Increased water temps in river during summers due to shallower water
  • Fish kills due to river lowering
  • Increase in evaporative losses.

During excavation, if floodplain pits are kept dry by pumping, they:

  • Lower local water tables
  • Potentially dewater nearby tributary channels
  • Desiccate riparian vegetation and floodplain wetlands.

Floodplain pits are often accompanied by channelization to maximize the floodplain area accessible for mining and to prevent the channel from eroding into pits. Miners may straighten channels and stabilize banks with rip rap. Even when successful in keeping pits “isolated,” the principal biological effects of floodplain and terrace-pit mining include:

  • Conversion of riparian forest to open pond habitat
  • Reduced habitat complexity in the channel
  • Loss of dynamic channel migration processes due to levees and bank protection
  • Lack of natural channel banks
  • Loss of riparian vegetation along hardened banks
  • Changes in the hyporheic zone dynamics potentially affecting stream water temperature and water quality
  • Increased potential for contamination of the alluvial aquifer due to the operation of equipment
  • Spills and the direct route to groundwater through the pit
  • Loss of floodplain wetlands
  • Dewatering of tributaries due to lowered water tables.

Pit Capture Inevitable

Often old pits are used to settle fines. Once filled, the pits act as fine sediment plugs in the floodplain. “Subsequent channel migration can erode these, releasing concentrated fine sediments into the channel,” say the authors.

After off-channel pits “inevitably” (authors’ wording) become captured by the channel, other impacts often result:

  • Bed and bank erosion upstream and downstream
  • Potential loss of infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, through “head cutting”
  • Bank erosion
  • Property destruction
  • Excessive downstream sedimentation

The authors claim capture is inevitable for floodplain pits, though not necessarily for terrace pits, which are usually higher in elevation and farther from the channel. Pit capture is most rapid when:

  • The pit lies inside of a meander
  • The upstream end of the pit is much lower than the adjacent channel
  • The river floods, creating a pressure difference inside and outside of pits that causes dikes to collapse.

Captured pits become lakes within the river, transforming lotic (moving water) environments into lentic (still water) environments, thereby inducing changes in the ecology of the reach.

In the Naugatuck River, Connecticut, captured pits have become lakes with seasonally stagnant water and low oxygen levels. Authorities there expect the pits to persist for hundreds of years.

“Moreover, channel incision and instability induced upstream of captured gravel pits could trigger other pit captures, resulting in widespread and long-term cumulative effects,” say the authors.

Reclamation Costs

Floodplain pits, when abandoned without remediation, “can be viewed as substantial liabilities for future generations, either to maintain their separation from the current channel, or if already breached, to suffer consequences of resultant channel incision … or to pay the price of re-isolating the breached pits.” They also pose safety hazards because of their steep sides.

On page 95, Kondolf et al. cite the costs of several public projects which became necessary after miners had abandoned pits. “The actual costs of isolating gravel pits will depend, of course, upon the surface area extent, excavation depth, and geometry of the pit and channel, as well as the availability and cost of suitable fill material. Experience to date in the Central Valley of California suggests that the costs … have been around $3-4 million per pit, although all these projects use dredger tailings available nearby” (and the costs are in 2001 dollars).

Decommissioning Costs Should Be Paid Upfront

“…pit isolation is a costly exercise, and given the likelihood of pit capture, these costs of “decommissioning” should probably be taken into consideration when permits for the gravel pits are initially awarded. It would be an interesting exercise to estimate the value of gravel extracted from these pits during their period of commercial operations compared to the current costs of reclamation.”

Alternative Sourcing Dependent on Full-Cost Accounting

Future regulation of aggregate mining should emphasize incentives to use alternative sources, such as … reservoir deltas, quarries and recycled concrete rubble. There is currently little incentive to use alternate sources. They generally require higher transport or production costs than aggregate taken from channels and floodplains.

Because the full costs of extracting aggregate from rivers and flood plains are not incorporated in the price paid for the product, it will be difficult to encourage use of alternatives. In effect, extraction of river/floodplain aggregate is subsidized.

Another study by M.D. Harvey and T.W. Smith found that the cost of mining-induced infrastructure damage was equivalent too $3/ton in a California river.* That’s equivalent to about $4.50/ton in today’s dollars.

Neither does the price of aggregate reflect the cost of dredging, which was necessitated here in part by the choice to locate mines in floodways. Dredging costs for Phase 1 of the West Fork already exceed $70 million. Phase 2 could easily cost another $100 million – all borne by taxpayers.

If such costs were incorporated into the price of river and flood plain aggregate, alternatives might look much more attractive.

*Gravel Mining Impacts on San Benito River, California. In: Proceedings of 1998 International Water Resources Engineering Conference, Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Memphis, TN, August 1998.

Posted by Bob Rehak on August 7, 2018

435 days since Hurricane Harvey

Immediate and Long-Term Risks Associated with River Sand Mining

Scientific literature from around the world has identified both immediate and long-term risks associated with sand and gravel mining. These risks underscore the need for tighter regulation of the sand mining industry in Texas, where the industry does not follow best practices commonly accepted in other states and countries.  Yet some miners here are pushing to start mining rivers (as opposed to flood plains where they mine now).

Why Don’t We Just Let Them Mine the River?

When looking at all the sediment in the San Jacinto, it’s logical to think, “Why don’t we just let sand miners mine the river?” However, many countries in the world have outlawed the practice of river mining, largely because of the dangers of over-mining. If Texas explores this solution, experience has shown that it should be under strict governmental supervision to prevent excesses which have widened rivers, damaged properties and destroyed the river environment elsewhere.

Sedimentation in the East Fork of the San Jacinto. This dune constricts the conveyance of the river by approximately 50 percent. It would be a likely target for river miners. But where would they mine after such obstructions are removed?

River mining differs from the type of remedial dredging that we are doing now. The objective for river mining is to maximize profit, which often means pushing limits. The motivation for dredging is to maximize profits by staying within the limits outlined by the client (i.e., the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).

The Australian Experience with River Mining

In Australia, the government of New South Whales discussed many of these risks in “The NSW Sand and Gravel Extraction Policy for Non Tidal Rivers.” The executive summary (page 5) describes the situation we face today in the Houston region.

“Evidence of environmental problems associated with river sand and gravel extraction is increasing. So also is the community’s expectation of river systems. Future management decisions must be based on the principle of sustainable development – sustainability not only of the sand and gravel resources but also of other river uses and values.”

The discussion of risks begins with an admonishment. “Management of sand and gravel extraction must ensure that the activity does not conflict with the aims of other component policies.” For instance, they say that, “Wild and scenic rivers, wetlands and designated recreational areas are all places where sand and gravel extraction would have a highly visible and adverse impact. Extraction should not be considered in such areas.” (Sec. 6.1.1, Page 16.)

To that list, I personally would add, “The source of drinking water for millions of people.” A growing body of evidence collected by the Houston-Galveston Area Council suggests that alarming bacterial growth in the West Fork of the San Jacinto can be linked to excess sedimentation.

The Major Risks of River Mining

Other risks outlined by New South Whales include:

  • “Excavation below water level disturbs fine grained sediments which are easily transported for long distances downstream.” (Section 6.1.2. Page 17.) In previous posts, we have seen how mining below the level of the San Jacinto river bed has contributed to the breach of dikes and the capture of sand pits during floods in our area.
  • “Increased rates of river erosion and other channel changes can occur in the shorter term, due to both natural and human-induced changes. These changes include increases in the size, magnitude and frequency of floods…” (Sec. 6.1.3. Page 17.)
  • “…excavation below existing bed level may be a direct cause of bank collapse.” (Sec. 6.1.4. Page 19.)
  • “The potential for increased riverbed and bank erosion is especially important in rivers where there are a number of extraction sites. To date the cumulative effect of a large number of small operations has not been controlled.”  (Sec. 6.1.4. Page 19.) This is especially true of the West Fork of the San Jacinto where we have approximately 20 square miles of sand mines between I-45 and U.S.59.
  • “Most of the finer sediments (sand, silt and clay) released from erosion of alluvial banks will be transported downstream, often for considerable distances. Increased siltation in these downstream areas can cause problems to navigation … and adversely impact flooding in the area.” (Sec. 6.1.5. Pages 19-20.) The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers found an increase in flood risk from sedimentation in its value engineering study on the West Fork last spring.
  • “If extraction is below the riverbed level, groundwater recharge from rivers to floodplain aquifers may be severely reduced. This will impact adversely on bores and wells in the area.” (Sec. 6.1.6. Page 20.) 
  • “Extraction of river sand and gravel often involves direct clearing of vegetation (that stabilizes soil). … Construction of access tracks and processing sites associated with the extraction process can also involve clearing of vegetation.” (Sec. 6.1.7. Page 20.)
  • “Suspended solids adversely affect many water users and ecosystems. They can significantly increase water treatment costs, especially where they act as a substrate for bacteria and so increase the problems and costs of disinfection in water treatment plants.” (Sec. 6.1.9. Page 20.)
  • “There will be some rivers, however, where the value to other users will be such that extraction may need to be precluded. Similarly, where past extraction has over-taxed a river system, future extraction may need to be precluded until the river has recovered sufficiently, if it does so at all.” (Sec. 6.1.12. Page 22.)

What to Do

The Australian report then goes on to talk about the need for sand and gravel to support road building and economic growth. (Sec. 6.2).

Section 6.3 talks about alternative sources for sand and gravel.

Section 6.4 talks about governmental costs to monitor sand and gravel extraction.

Section 7 talks about guidelines for safe extraction when mining in rivers and how to crack down on illegal activity (something we desperately need to do here as well). Here they talk about the opportunity to involve community members as extra pairs of eyes and the need to enroll major purchases (such as TxDoT) in the enforcement effort.

Section 8 talks about permitting procedures.

Section 9 talks about performance measures and monitor programs. Here they have some novel measures that we could learn from. I especially like Section 9.3, Community Monitoring. Inputs include:

  • Data collected by local community groups including extractors; 
  • Reports by local ‘care’ groups and riparian landowners; 
  • Reports by local environmental or recreational interest groups; 
  • Reports by local TCM Committees; 
  • Reports by local government. 

Such an inclusive approach helps guarantee that the needs of various interest groups are balanced.

Australian Conclusions: A Cautionary Tale

Section 10, the Conclusion, says on page 36: “There are many natural causes which may increase the rate of riverbed and bank erosion. However, extraction of large amounts of sand and gravel from within the channels has exacerbated the situation in many rivers. Past experience in some areas of the State has shown that crisis point can be reached. In other areas, increasing conflict with other river uses has made extraction of sand and gravel a less viable option.”

If the State of Texas decides to permit river mining, I sincerely hope we can find a workable balance for the San Jacinto that protects everyone’s interests.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/5/2018

433 Days since Hurricane Harvey

 

 

 

Subsidence, Flooding and the Lone Star Ground Water Conservation District Election

Note: If you are from Harris County, you cannot vote in this election, but it still affects you. Please forward this link to friends in Montgomery County. This is an update of a previous post and recommends some candidates at the end.

Next Tuesday, Montgomery County voters will elect board members to the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District (LSGCD) for the first time ever. Some candidates advocate using more groundwater, a move that could give residents cheaper water in the short run, but which could also cause subsidence and contribute to flooding in the long run. It could even create shortages, raise water costs and limit growth. Here’s how.

How Subsidence Can Increase Flood Risk

When ground subsides, it sinks. In this region, the primary cause is groundwater removal.

“Using surface water instead of groundwater reduces subsidence. Where groundwater use has been reduced, subsidence has generally ceased,” said Michael Turco, General Manager of the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District. 

Southern Montgomery County, and northern and northwestern Harris County have some of the highest subsidence rates in the region today.

Yet some Montgomery County voters advocate removing more ground water because, at this moment, it’s cheaper than surface water. They are betting their future and their neighbors’ futures on it.

One part of Baytown, the Brownwood subdivision, is a classic, visually striking, and cautionary example of subsidence.  Brownwood subsided so much that it became uninhabitable. Excessive groundwater pumping by industry around Galveston Bay caused the area to sink ten feet.

In 1944, the area that would become Brownwood in Baytown was starting to show signs of development.

By 1978, Brownwood was well developed…and sinking fast. Then, in 1983, a 12-foot storm surge from Alicia destroyed the entire community.

Today, Brownwood floods so much that all homes are gone. Baytown converted what was left into a park.

Coastal vs. Differential Subsidence

Inland areas also face flood threats from subsidence, but not the kind associated with storm surge. In Montgomery County and surrounding areas, the flood threat comes from sinking at different rates in different places.

Example: subsidence around Jersey Village created a “bowl” within the landscape that has been linked to increased flooding there. See the contour map below.

Other examples: The Woodlands and Kingwood sank two feet in the last century. Most of Buffalo Bayou sank eight.

Red contours show subsidence in last century. Blue contours show subsidence in first 16 years of this century. Note how the small red circle near Jersey Village (A) quickly expanded to the large blue circle around it. Also note (B) the widening gap between red and blue at the top of the frame. This shows that areas that depend on groundwater, i.e., Montgomery County, are subsiding faster than those on surface water, i.e., most of Harris County. Source: Harris-Galveston Subsidence District.

Three Ways Unequal Subsidence Increases Flood Risk

Unequal sinking contributes to flooding by changing the slope of rivers and streams.

  • If the slope increases, water flows faster and contributes to flooding downstream.
  • If slope decreases, water moves more slowly or even pools, contributing to flooding upstream.
  • Sinking between two drainage basins can even divert floodwater from one basin to another.

The “Pump-Now, Let-Somebody-Else-Pay-Later” Mentality

Subsidence happens so slowly that some people claim it’s not a problem – especially those on higher ground. They want to continue pumping water from wells because they perceive it to be cheaper than surface water.

It can be – at least in the short run– until wells run low or dry. Then pumping costs increase – often along with salinity – and the people who depend on the well are out of water and out of luck.

Much of the groundwater in Montgomery County used for human consumption is pumped from the Jasper aquifer which also affects Harris and Galveston Counties. Source Harris-Galveston Subsidence District.

And that high ground they enjoyed? If it subsides faster than surrounding areas, they can alter the slope of rivers and creeks, increasing their own flood risk, like Jersey Village. This is currently happening in southern Montgomery County and northern Harris County.

Depleting at More Than 500X the Recharge Rate

Still, some people say, “I’ll worry about that when it becomes a problem.”

Problem is:

The rate of depletion will exceed the rate of recharge by more than 500X – an environmental catastrophe.

More Expensive in Long Run

Now consider this. Experience and science show that pressure in an aquifer will decrease when pumping exceeds the recharge rate. And as pressure in an aquifer decreases, the cost of bringing water to the surface increases dramatically. Then recovery is no longer economical, i.e., competitive with surface water. It’s like the oil industry. As a rule of thumb, half the oil in reservoirs is left underground. It’s simply too expensive to recover because of low pressure.

For all these reasons, most counties in the region are trying to switch people to surface water. Groundwater withdrawals in Waller, Liberty, Grimes, Walker and San Jacinto Counties have either declined or stayed the same since 2000.

Counties surrounding Montgomery have either decreased groundwater pumping or kept it steady.

Meanwhile, Montgomery County’s groundwater withdrawals have soared. A report by LBG Guyton Associates to the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District showed that the largest pumping increase since 2000 occurred in Montgomery County.

Montgomery County groundwater pumping virtually tripled in the last three decades.

Montgomery County Growth

The surge in Montgomery County groundwater usage is largely because of growth. On a percentage basis, Montgomery County is growing faster than any county in the region except Fort Bend.

Montgomery County growth trails only Fort Bend.

So Why Worry NOW?

Water resources take so long to develop that they need to be planned 50 years ahead. If Montgomery County hopes to keep growing rapidly, where will water come from to support that growth? Especially if voters undermine financial viability of the half-billion-dollar, surface-water treatment plant – that they just built – by shifting back to groundwater!

The San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) finished the plant in 2015 to comply with the LSGCD requirement to reduce groundwater use. Many people don’t realize that the SJRA pumps groundwater from 38 wells to supply The Woodlands. The SJRA must comply with LSGCD regulations like everyone else.

To comply, the SJRA and 90 other water utilities who partnered with them, drew up plans for a surface water treatment plant and signed contracts to purchase water from it. The SJRA then borrowed money from the State and built the plant. Inevitably, the cost of water increased to cover construction.

After it was built, several providers changed their minds and began pushing the LSGCD board to produce more groundwater to take costs back down. When the board refused, the breakaway faction succeeded in getting a measure on November’s ballot to elect an LSGCD board more favorable to groundwater pumping.

Since 2001, the LSGCD has had a nine-member board appointed by a combination of local entities. They include Montgomery County, cities, and MUDs. The SJRA even has one seat.  The appointees are experts who fully understand the future consequences of subsidence and unlimited groundwater pumping; an elected board may not.

If an elected board ignores the science and allows unlimited groundwater pumping, it would affect the financial projections on which the surface water plant was built.

Betting the Future

If people vote for candidates who advocate using “cheaper” groundwater in the short term, they will also be voting for subsidence and policies that limit long-term growth. Without question, they will be betting their future, their children’s futures and their neighbors’ futures on a rapidly depleting water source.

If that’s the will of the people, so be it. I just hope they don’t set a precedent that residents in neighboring counties follow. If so, we could all be sunk.

Candidates Who Believe in Science-Based, Groundwater Management

Fortunately, there are people running for LSGWCD board positions who believe in science-based, groundwater management. Knowledgeable acquaintances in Montgomery County recommend the following candidates who, they say, have professional experience related to water management and/or water supply, and would work to preserve Montgomery County’s future, reduce subsidence and prevent flooding:

  • Place 1, County Precinct 1 – Stuart Taylor
  • Place 2, County Precinct 2 – Garry Oakley
  • Place 3, County Precinct 3 – Rick Moffatt
  • Place 4, County Precinct 4 – Gail Carney
  • Place 5, County At Large – Gregg Hope
  • Place 6, Conroe – Jackie Chance, Sr.
  • Place 7, The Woodlands – Kent Maggert

Please spread the word to every voter you know in Montgomery County.

Posted by Bob Rehak, November 3, 2018

431 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Effects of Harvey on Seniors and Real-Estate: The Enclave Case Study

We like to think of change as being steady and continuous. For instance, we get a little bit older each year, and depending on our age, we get a little bit stronger or weaker.

A “State Change” in Peoples’ Lives

But in nature, the major changes are not steady and not continuous. They are sudden, jarring and dramatic. They involve toggling from one “state” to another. For instance, water is a liquid until the temperature drops to 32ºF; then it becomes a solid. A tenacious leaf hangs on the tree through spring, summer and fall, until a winter storm finally blows it to the ground. Snow piles high on the mountain until weight and temperature … create an avalanche.

So it was with many Kingwood seniors – safe and comfortable, living a somewhat privileged existence in the center of Kingwood…right up until the moment a monster named Harvey crept under their front doors.

Bill Fowler, a real estate expert, worked for ExxonMobil until he retired. He is now co-chair of the Lake Houston Area Grass Roots Flood Prevention Initiative. Fowler has been analyzing the impact of Harvey on local real-state. Recently, he concluded an analysis of home values in The Enclave. This post is based on his hard work.

About The Enclave

For those of you not familiar with the Enclave, it is an upscale subdivision in the heart of Kingwood, south of Randall’s in Town Center. Homes average 2369 square feet. All but one or two are single story. Most of the homes are zero-lot-line or have postage-stamp yards, perfect for empty nesters who hate mowing lawns.

Enclave residents can walk to shopping, restaurants, banks, drug stores, public transportation, the library, parks, trails and more. Virtually all are on a series of short cul-de-sacs where people get to know their neighbors for an exceptional sense of safety and security.

In the Heart of the Heart of One of Houston’s Most Prestigious Communities

For all the reasons above, the Enclave has always been popular with older people approaching or reaching retirement. People didn’t just move there, they put down roots there. A home in the Enclave put you in the heart of the heart of one of Houston’s most prestigious communities.

  • Of 165 homes in the Enclave, 74% had over-65 exemptions on their real-estate taxes in 2017.
  • According to the National Association of Homebuilders, 12% of Americans have lived in their homes for 20-29 years; but 35% of Enclave residents have lived there that long, virtually triple the national average.
  • Half of the residents have owned their homes for at least 13 years.
  • Despite the age of the residents, many years have gone by with less than five homes changing hands.
  • While 11.2% of Americans moved in 2016 (a historical low), only 3.2% of Enclave residents moved that year, about one fourth of the national average.

Then Came Harvey

Things changed suddenly. All 165 homes in The Enclave flooded. Harvey uprooted all residents – at least temporarily.

Forty-four owners sold damaged homes “as-is” that were their primary residences. We know they were primary residences because they received Homestead Exemptions from the Harris County Appraisal District [HCAD]. Thirty percent of all owners decided to bail (pardon the pun) rather than go through the challenge of restoration: ten times the percentage that moved the prior year!

Sixteen additional homes in the Enclave did NOT have homestead exemptions, according to HCAD. This indicates they were being rented or leased. It is highly unlikely that renters would return to damaged homes; they had no equity, only risk.

So if we add those sixteen to the other 44 homes, we have 60 homes where residents likely chose not to return after Harvey. That takes the percentage of those not returning up to 36% of the community. Twelve times the prior year’s rate!

Due to limitations of the available online HCAD data, it is not possible to further delineate the demographic makeup of the non-owner occupied homes.

However, it is interesting to note the following about those over 65:

  • 74% of all owners had an Over-65 exemption before Harvey.
  • 89% of owner/residents choosing to sell were over 65. This indicates the flood was disproportionately harder for older people to deal with.
  • 36% of all primary-residence homes owned by those over 65 were actually sold.
  • Of those over-65 electing to sell their homes, on average, the owners had lived in their homes 15 years—some as many as 25 years.
  • 49% of primary-residence homes sold by those over 65 were owned by a single owner (divorced, widowed or never married), rather than jointly owned.
  • Eighteen homes remain for sale or rent, many by owners rather than through agents.
  • The total HCAD value for all 165 homes in the subdivision dropped from $40.7 million before Harvey to $30.4 million after. Owners lost more than 25% in market value due to Harvey.
  • The City, County and School District lost more than $10 million in assessed value from this one subdivision.
  • The average home went from $247,000 in value to $184,000, a loss of $63,000 overnight.
  • Those who chose to stay and repair their homes, but who didn’t have flood insurance, lost even more.

Fourteen months later, construction trucks still line the otherwise quiet streets and driveways. The shrill whine of circle saws still pierces the afternoon calm. Construction permits still dot the windows of empty homes. Eighteen homes remain for sale.

Waiting for Mitigation

Retirees who lost their largest investment pray the politicians aren’t playing games with flood mitigation. Dredging has started, but is leaving the largest blockage in the river where it will do the most damage in another flood. More flood gates for the Lake Houston Dam are still two or three mayors away. Most residents won’t live long enough to see the benefit of additional upstream detention. And the grant application for a watershed study that’s a pre-requisite for all of those mitigation projects? Well, that has been sitting on someone’s desk at FEMA for seven months.

The residents I have talked to say they will rebuild this one time, but never again. More on that later this week in another Impact interview.

Statistical Analysis by Bill Fowler, Co-Chair, Lake Houston Area Grass Roots Flood Prevention Initiative

Posted by Bob Rehak on November 2, 2018

430 days since Hurricane Harvey