News Archives - Page 49 of 282

Addicks-Barker Litigation Update

12/9/2024 – Testimony concluded today in the latest appeal of the Addicks-Barker lawsuits arising out of Hurricane Harvey.

During Harvey, homes both upstream and downstream of the Addicks and Barkers Reservoirs flooded. Residents allege that the Army Corps’ management of gates on the reservoirs contributed to flooding their homes. The cases have wended their way through the federal court system almost since the storm flooded large parts of Houston’s west side.

Downstream Case

Previously, a trial court ruled against the downstream plaintiffs. The U.S. Court of Federal Claims held that plaintiffs did not have “a cognizable property interest in perfect flood control.” An appeals court disagreed. It sent the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.

The new downstream trial began on Friday October 25 at the Federal Courthouse in downtown Houston. It is a limited trial aimed at answering two questions from the judge:

(1) Was there an emergency that necessitated the United States Army Corps of Engineers (the “Corps”) opening the Addicks and Barker reservoir gates, or were the gates opened as a matter of ordinary operating procedure; and

(2) What would have happened if the gates had remained closed?

McGehee ☆ Chang, Landgraf, Feiler, attorneys for the plaintiffs in the Addicks-Barker cases, reported that they examined one expert witness and three fact witnesses on October 31, 2024. The witnesses included the former district commander of the Army Corps and the Corp’s chief of engineering for the district.

An expert witness for the plaintiff testified that: (1) There was no emergency involved in opening the flood gates. And (2) If the gates were closed, most of the downstream properties would not have flooded; and the duration and extent of flooding would have been reduced for those who would have inevitably flooded.

After testimony by two more expert witnesses, the next phase of the trial concluded today in Washington DC.

The plaintiffs’ attorney’s report that Corps’ staff “admitted that no emergency was ever declared by the Corps (during Harvey).” Also, plaintiffs’ attorneys say that “the Corps’ own expert witness had largely agreed that the majority of downstream properties would not have flooded if the gates had remained closed.”

Next Steps in Downstream Case

Plaintiffs will submit their post-trial brief summarizing their case to the Court on or before January 31, 2025. The government must submit its brief on or before February 25, 2025. Closing arguments are scheduled to take place in Houston on March 6, 2025, at 3:00 p.m.

There is no indication when the judge will make a final ruling.

Upstream Case

The upstream trial concluded in 2022. The government appealed on December 29th that year. On June 21, 2023, the government filed a 168 page brief, contending that:

The upstream flooding was caused by the unprecedented nature of Harvey rainfall – and not by the government’s actions
The government was trying to save life and private property – and that private properties are subject to the government’s “police power” (to protect public safety)
That the home owners are not entitled to recover certain categories of “damages” (such as lost profits and leasehold, displacement costs, personal property…etc).

Plaintiffs then responded to those claims in October 2023.

The court heard oral arguments from both sides on November 8, 2024. The government continued to claim that Harvey was a disaster that was a once in one-thousand-year occurrence, and that the government should not be penalized for this extremely rare event.

Plaintiffs contended that while Harvey was a significant rain event, it was not as infrequent as the government claimed.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys expect the court to issue its decision within another five months or so. That would ring the bell for the next round sometime in April or May of 2025.

Editorial Comment

We’re already more than seven years beyond Harvey, the event that triggered these lawsuits. Delays underscore the need for flood insurance; many homeowners will have likely died before the courts resolve these cases.

But flood insurance costs are rising rapidly. To help combat those rising costs, visit FloodSmart.gov. This FEMA-sponsored site gives you flood insurance quotes, connects you with agents, explains your flood risk, and discusses what to do before and after a flood. It also contains links to flood maps.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/8/2024

2659 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Dredge Still in Starting Blocks

12/8/24 – Callan Marine moved its dredge down the San Jacinto West Fork to a location between Atascocita Point and Royal Shores more than two weeks ago. But it hasn’t moved yet. Reasons for the delay are unclear at this point.

Still Anchored in Same Spot

This morning, the rain let up long enough to get some drone shots. Unfortunately, it appears that the dredge hasn’t moved since November. It’s anchored in the same spot in the same position as on November 23, 2024. To borrow a phrase from track and field, it hasn’t gotten out of the starting blocks.

There was no sign of any dredge pipe south of FM1960, where Callan had reportedly purchased some property for a disposal site according to a City spokesperson.

The dredge was anchored with its bit up, surrounded by tugs and pontoons.

*Tugs and pontoons with supplies and an excavator surround the dredge.*

*Dredge was anchored with bit up between Royal Shores and Atascocita Point on West Fork.*

Callan has welded several sections of dredge pipe together. They are strung out along a channel that connects the East and West Forks south of Royal Shores.

*See one long section of pipe on the left and two shorter sections on right.* *Atascocita Point on far shore.*

Reason for Pause Uncertain

A source familiar with the dredging industry suggested that delays might have to do with the placement area not yet being ready to receive spoils. But that’s speculation. I hope to learn more in coming days.

Purpose of Project

The purpose of the project is to help remove sediment that restricts the conveyance of the river system and also to help restore some of Lake Houston’s dwindling volume.

Former City Flood Czar Stephen Costello outlined the program approximately a year ago. The City plans to spend $34 million to remove almost 900,000 cubic yards of sediment east of Atascocita and south of the convergence of the East and West Forks.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/8/2024

2658 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Bayou Land Conservancy Volunteers Protect Nature’s Flood Protection

12/7/24 – One of the leading environmental groups in the Houston region is the Bayou Land Conservancy (BLC). Their motto: “We preserve land along streams for flood control, clean water, and wildlife.”

Last year, BLC volunteers logged thousands of hours maintaining and improving natural areas and trails that help others appreciate nature’s wonders.

One such volunteer is Jeff Hodges. He helped restore land along Spring Creek in BLC’s Arrowwood Preserve, which is being used for environmental education. His story is a testament to the tenacity of BLC volunteers in their service of nature. Below are excepts from Hodges’ responses to my questions.

Preserve’s Contribution to Flood Reduction

Rehak: How does the Bayou Land Conservancy help reduce flooding?

Hodges: Development in the Houston area will continue. We need to understand how this can lead to increased flood risk of flooding if not managed correctly.

BLC is a land trust. It protects lands where rain water is absorbed and held as flood waters, slowing down the release of water into creeks, streams and rivers. That helps reduce or eliminate flooding downstream.

These lands are increasingly important. They let water soak into the land providing much needed water, to the water table and aquifers.

Currently, ever major aquifer in the U.S. is being depleted, except in the Pacific Northwest. This depletion contributes to subsidence, which increases flood risk. Areas in the Woodlands have lost two feet of elevation from subsidence.

The lands that BLC protects also provide habitat for wildlife and give people a chance to enjoy nature.

Rehak: Specifically, how does Arrowwood reduce flooding along Spring Creek.

Hodges: Arrowwood is a natural flood plain. It slows and stores rainwater flowing toward Spring Creek. A large portion of the preserve floods in heavy rains. It gives stormwater someplace to sit and wait instead of moving quickly downstream and flooding other areas already developed.

Restoring the Natural Environment

Rehak: I hear that in trying to make Arrowwood more user friendly, you and your fellow volunteers removed more than a mile of silt fence. How did it get there?

Hodges: A sand-and-gravel company installed the silt fence when it applied for a permit to turn the property into a quarry. But neighbors blocked approval of the permit. The mining company, after a number of years, donated the land to Bayou Land Conservancy.

Rehak: Removing that silt fence must have been a chore!

Hodges: We actually made a short movie about it. The preserve comprises 117 acres and the fence surrounded 22 acres. As work began to make the preserve accessible, we realized that we did not have the correct equipment to remove the silt fence.

*Bayou Land Conservancy Volunteer Jeff Hodges led the Arrowwood Silt Fence Removal Project*

We originally estimated the preserve had 2 miles of silt fencing containing approximately 700 posts, each weighing 5 pounds.
Jeff Hodges

The task seemed overwhelming. But we were very concerned about the impact of the fence on wildlife. Turtles and other small wildlife couldn’t get over or around it.

Volunteers Discover Task is Herculean

Rehak: What kind of problems did you encounter?

Hodges: I started to wonder if we could remove the silt fence manually. Bayou Land Conservancy gave me and a small team permission to work on it. The first day, two of us tried to develop a process to remove the silt fencing. In a half day, we could only remove about 10 posts and 50 feet of fencing.

Most of the posts had to be dug out by hand. Each was four feet and originally pounded into the ground to a depth of two feet. But over time, silt built up around the fence. Many sections were totally buried.

The silt fencing has three components: posts, heavy metal fencing, and a plastic tarp. The combination prevents silt, sand and rocks from washing into the creek.

After the first day, most people would have been discouraged. But our volunteers proved it could be done. It was just going to take a lot of time and effort.

*Volunteers decided to separate the fence and post removal operations to speed things up.*

We decided we would remove the metal fence along with the black tarp first. We left the posts until we were able to develop a better way to remove them.

But the removal of the fencing was not without problems. Portions of the fencing were buried, so we had to dig them out. Worse, the fencing had become overgrown. Before we could remove it, we first had to remove fallen trees, and cut away vines and brambles.

Triumph of Ingenuity, Sweat and Safety Goggles

Rehak: Did you ever develop a faster system?

Hodges: As we removed fencing over the next couple of months, we worked on developing a technique to remove posts without digging. Eventually, we developed a technique that sped up the operation. We hit the posts with a sledge hammer on all four sides to loosen them. Then we hooked up a farm jack to pry them out of the ground.

Working as a team, we could remove about 15 posts per hour. Some, buried to the top in heavy clay, still had to be dug out by hand. Those just took longer.

Everyone working on this project had to wear long pants, long sleeves, safety glasses, and heavy-duty work gloves. We also had to be up to date on our tetanus shots, too for obvious reasons.

Rehak: What did the final boxscore say?

Hodges: All in all, the team ended up removing 499 posts and more than 1.5 miles of fencing. While working on the fencing, we also removed trash and litter which seemed to be everywhere. Fencing and trash filled two industrial dumpsters.

*Some of the trash and fencing materials removed from the BLC Arrowwood Preserve.*

It was grueling work. But the transformation of the land is overwhelming. And very satisfying. The beauty of what this preserve will become is now evident.

Postscript: Jill Boullion, Bayou Land Conservancy Executive Director, said, ““Jeff was awarded our Trailblazer Award for 2024 because of his leadership on this project. It’s an important part of our restoration plan for Arrowwood that will make the preserve even more ecologically valuable for the community. We appreciate volunteers like Jeff and the crew that did this very difficult project.”

Posted by Bob Rehak and Jeff Hodges on 12/7/24

2657 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Can Cypress Creek Stormwater Detention Offset SJRA Releases from Lake Conroe?

12/6/24 – When you look at Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) spending figures, it’s clear they are making a major flood-mitigation investment along Cypress Creek. At the end of the third quarter this year, HCFCD had spent more than $190 million on Cypress Creek projects since Hurricane Harvey. That was enough to rank it second among all Harris County watersheds. Only Brays Bayou received more funding.

Cypress Creek Stormwater Detention Basin at TC Jester — *New stormwater-detention basin under construction in September 2023 at Cypress Creek and TC Jester.*

So I asked how much the county’s investment in stormwater detention basins along Cypress Creek could help offset future releases from Lake Conroe by the SJRA during flood events.

Of course, any detention upstream helps offset flooding downstream. So the question is really “Can additional detention offset SJRA releases significantly?”

“Not a 1:1 Storage Question”

Harris County Precinct 3 Senior Project Manager Eric Heppen, P.E., PMP, explained how a professional engineer would answer my seemingly innocent question. It’s far more complex than it looks.

“Significantly” masks several layers of complexity.

For instance, how:

Much can Lake Conroe release compared to the total detention along Cypress Creek?
Fast is the SJRA releasing from Lake Conroe?
Long would the SJRA release last?
Much does the water spread out before reaching Lake Houston?

And then there are the questions of rainfall distribution and the arrival time of peaks. Is it raining as hard along Cypress Creek as it is above Lake Conroe’s dam? What if the flood peaks don’t arrive simultaneously?

For all these reasons, said Heppen, “It’s never going to be a 1:1 storage question. From a Lake-Houston-Area perspective, you can’t say that an acre foot of water held back on Cypress Creek exactly equals an acre-foot of water released from Lake Conroe.” Then he went on to answer my question as best he could given the uncertainties involved.

Comparison of Total Stormwater Detention

Heppen began by pointing out that studies show Cypress Creek needs another 25,000 acre-feet of floodwater storage. “Our initial goal is to add another 12,000-14,000 acre feet,” he said.

Lake Conroe, on the other hand, has a surface area of 21,000 acres. And the SJRA has an easement that gives it the ability to raise the lake six feet. For comparison, that’s 126,000 acre feet of additional detention, roughly 10X more than the detention volume being added to Cypress Creek initially or 5X more than the desired 25,000 acre feet.

So additional Cypress detention, when complete, would equal 10-20% of the variable storage that SJRA has to work with at Lake Conroe. That can make a dent in Lake Houston Area flooding.

Comparison of Release Rates and Durations

However, Heppen did not stop there. He also calculated how long Cypress Creek’s additional detention could offset releases from Lake Conroe. “IF the dam releases at 6,000 cubic feet per second (CFS) then that is approximately an acre foot every 7 seconds or so,” said Heppen. “That would mean SJRA was releasing approximately 500 acre feet per hour.”

“So…very, very, very simplified, if Harris County adds 10,000 acre feet along Cypress, and Lake Conroe releases 6,000 CFS, then the additional detention along Cypress Creek could take the increased release rate for nearly 20 hours,” added Heppen.

Compare that to actual release rates during a large flood. Affidavits by SJRA engineers show that releases above 70,000 CFS from Lake Conroe lasted 26 hours during Harvey.

Shaving 6,000 CFS off those releases for 20 hours could well have saved many homes and businesses on the periphery of the flood.

Conclusion: Blunted Peaks

The initial 12,000 to 14,000 acre feet of stormwater detention being added to Cypress Creek could have blunted the peak of Harvey had it been there at the time. The desired 25,000 acre feet would have made an even greater impact.

Of course, flooding is all about timing, i.e., when peaks arrive. But if the Lake Conroe and Cypress Creek peaks arrived at the US59 bridge simultaneously, the Cypress Creek storage could have reduced the combined peak significantly in my opinion.

Additional upstream detention was one of the three main goals advocated by the Lake Houston Area Task Force after Harvey. And I, for one, am all for the improvements being made to Cypress Creek stormwater-detention capacity.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/6/2024

2656 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Tsunamis, Storm Surge Demonstrate Power of Moving Water

12/5/2024 – Tsunamis are huge waves caused by earthquakes. Storm surge is a huge wave caused by hurricane winds. Both have unimaginable destructive power.

Bolivar after Ike — *Destruction on Bolivar Peninsula from Hurricane Ike* *storm surge in 2008.*

West Coast Tsunami Warning This Morning

This morning, a magnitude 7.3 earthquake struck Northern California. That caused the National Weather Service to issue tsunami warnings from Oregon down to San Francisco and beyond.

About three hours later, the warning was cancelled without explanation. Since then, significant aftershocks ranging from 3.0 to 5.3 magnitude have occurred. We will learn more in coming days.

Different Types of Earthquakes Trigger Different Tsunami Threat Levels

Massive earthquakes don’t always trigger massive tsunamis. The magnitude 7.9 quake that destroyed much of San Francisco in 1906 reportedly produced a wave height of only three inches. Small localized, underwater landslides created 1-2 foot waves, but their destruction was confined to small areas.

Geology determines, in large part, the height of a tsunami. Imagine two different types of geologic faults.

In a thrust fault, one tectonic plate is forced under another, pushing it up and causing a vertical displacement of the seafloor. This type of fault commonly generates a tsunami.

However, a strike-slip fault causes a lateral displacement. Land along a fault moves in opposite directions without causing elevation changes. Strike-slip faults typically do not generate tsunamis because they generally do not displace large volumes of water. (Contrast the animations in the two links above.)

Other factors may also affect tsunami formation. They include:

Depth: Shallow earthquakes (occurring at depths less than 70 km) are more likely to cause tsunamis than deep earthquakes, as the energy has a more direct impact on the seafloor.
Seafloor Topography: The configuration of the ocean floor, including ridges and trenches, can amplify or reduce tsunami formation.
Underwater Landslides or Underwater Volcanic Activity triggered by the earthquake can also contribute to tsunami generation.

In summary, while massive offshore earthquakes increase the risk of tsunamis, they do not guarantee one will occur.

In this case, officials issued the tsunami warning out of an abundance of caution when seismographs first detected the earthquake. Later, they cancelled the warning when it became clear no massive waves threatened. They made the right call initially. Here’s why.

Record Waves, Record Destruction

Some massive earthquakes, like the magnitude 9.0, 2011 Tōhoku earthquake in Japan, did produce devastating tsunamis. One wave reached more than six miles inland. A 48-foot high tsunami wiped out a nuclear power plant at Fukushima. And the death toll ultimately reached almost 20,000 people.

So you can imagine why California officials immediately issued warnings today for residents to evacuate to higher ground.

During the great Galveston hurricane of 1900, a giant wave of water caused by storm surge, not a tsunami, inundated the island with 8- to 12-feet of water. It killed an estimated 6,000 to 12,000 people.

One cubic foot of seawater weighs 64 pounds. Imagine getting stuck by tens of thousands of cubic feet. That’s why storm surge is the leading cause of death associated with tropical events, according to the National Weather Service.

Don’t take either storm surge or tsunamis lightly.

Elevation: Key to Survival

The National Weather Service’s Tsunami Warning Center offers an excellent FAQ page concerning tsunami warnings.

Interestingly, shortly after NWS issued the tsunami warning for the San Francisco area this afternoon, I had a huge spike in traffic on ReduceFlooding.com. Everyone was going to a post with the headline “Easy way to find the elevation of your home and the slopes around it.“

I notice the same spike in traffic every time floods threaten. People want to know whether they live higher than the expected crest of the flood, storm surge or, in this case, tsunami.

Published in 2020, the post has received more than 150,000 page views already this year. The biggest peaks were during the May storm, Beryl, Helene and Milton.

Ironically, when I wrote that post about elevation, tsunamis were the furthest thing from my mind.

Even more ironic, shortly before the warning, someone emailed me asking whether I thought a development near the San Jacinto West Fork was safe from flooding. I replied to her that if she had a concern about flood risk, she should buy on the highest ground she could afford, as far from the water as she could get.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/5/2024

2655 Days since Hurricane Harvey

System Capacity Maps for Harris County Channels Reveal Widespread Problems

12/2/24 – System capacity maps for each of Harris County’s 23 watersheds show widespread problems and raise questions about whether the county’s most severe needs are confined to historically underserved areas.

Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) released the maps in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

What “System Capacity” Means

System capacity reflects the ability of a stream or channel to handle rainfall of different intensities before coming out of its banks. The way system capacity is expressed also reflects the expected frequency of over-bank events.

A channel that can hold a:

100-year rainfall has a 1% system capacity
50-year rainfall has a 2% system capacity
25-year rainfall has a 4% system capacity, etc.

“1% system capacity” indicates that the infrastructure is designed to handle the peak flow or volume associated with a 1% event without causing overflow or flooding.

One Key Part of Comprehensive Flood-Risk Picture

System-capacity maps are one piece of information used in determining a comprehensive view of flood risk. They help you quickly spot areas that need closer examination.

Other key factors used to determine flood risk include: topography around the channel, the elevation of a structure, degree of development in an area, building codes in effect when an area was built, population density, and more.

Impact of Atlas 14

The maps released today rely on pre-Atlas 14 data. Harris County did not provide current maps. Nor do they reflect improvements made to channels recently. But the older maps are still instructive because they formed the starting point for spending billions of flood-mitigation dollars. However…

Because these maps are based on old rainfall standards, today’s true system capacity is actually lower than shown.

Said another way, the situation on the ground is worse than the maps show. That’s because the transition from pre-Atlas 14 to Atlas-14 data in Harris County resulted in significant increases in estimated rainfall depths for various storm events.

Notably, the 1% annual exceedance probability (AEP) 24-hour rainfall depth—commonly referred to as the “100-year” event—experienced substantial changes.

Prior to Atlas 14, Harris County was divided into three hydrologic regions with the following 100-year, 24-hour rainfall depths:

Region 1: 12.4 inches
Region 2: 12.8 inches
Region 3: 13.5 inches

With the implementation of Atlas 14, these values increased to:

Region 1: 16.3 inches
Region 2: 16.9 inches
Region 3: 18.0 inches

This represents increases of approximately 31%, 32%, and 33% for Regions 1, 2, and 3, respectively.

These updated figures reflect a more accurate understanding of rainfall patterns, incorporating additional years of data and improved analytical methods. Consequently, infrastructure design and floodplain management practices in Harris County have been adjusted to align with these revised estimates, enhancing resilience against flooding events.

Value of Maps Based on Old Rainfall Standards

Still, these maps have value. They are a starting point for the $2.5 billion 2018 Flood Bond. They also show that:

All watersheds have problem areas
Channel capacity in some areas is extremely low
Some watersheds that are not “historically underserved” have more severe system-capacity issues than those that are underserved.

System Capacity Maps

Below are low-resolution maps for each of the 23 watersheds in Harris County. For high-resolution maps of all watersheds in one file, click here. Caution: [26-meg download.]

Correlation of Maps with Spending

It’s instructive to correlate HCFCD flood-mitigation spending with these maps. Below is where more than $2 billion has gone since Hurricane Harvey, in large part, to address the problems shown above.

Spending by Watershed since Harvey — *Data supplied by HCFCD. Shows relative spending by watershed since Harvey through Q3 2024.*

*HCFCD spending by watershed through Q3 2024 since Harvey in dollars.*

Compare the maps with the spending. And use the contact form of this website to let me know if you feel your area is not getting its fair share of flood-mitigation funding.

Note on Next Update with Atlas 14 Data

I have tried to get accurate flood risk data for years. However, HCFCD says it does not routinely update these maps every time it completes a new construction project. The District says it may update them again as part of the MAAPnext project after FEMA approves new maps based on Atlas-14 data.

Posted by Bob Rehak on December 2, 2024

2652 Days since Hurricane Harvey

The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.

Looking Back at the 2024 Hurricane Season

12/1/24 – The 2024 Atlantic Hurricane Season ended yesterday. The season predicted to be “extreme” turned out to be “above average,” according to the National Hurricane Center (NHC).

The Atlantic basin, which includes the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico, saw 18 named storms in 2024.

Of the 18, 11 became hurricanes and five became major hurricanes.

Comparison of 2024 to 30-Year Average

Each of these numbers is greater than the average for the 30-year period from 1991-2020. See table below.

	*1991-2020 Average*	*2024*
Named Storms (39 mph or greater)	14	18
Hurricanes (74 mph or greater)	7	11
Major Hurricanes (111 or greater)	3	5

Source: National Hurricane Center

Landfalls in U.S.

According to NHC, five hurricanes made landfall in the continental U.S. Significantly, two of those storms made landfall as major hurricanes.

Comparison to Predictions

The Atlantic seasonal activity fell within the predicted ranges for named storms and hurricanes issued by NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center in the 2024 August Hurricane Season Outlook.

Atypical Season Took Dip Where Peak Should Have Been

But 2024 was an atypical season. It started with a bang, fell into a lull, and then ended with a record.

Hurricane Beryl was the earliest Atlantic basin Category-5 hurricane on record. It caused significant storm surge flooding across parts of Texas and Louisiana after making landfall near Matagorda, Texas, as a Category-1 storm. People on my street are still cleaning up from Beryl!

However, later in the year, Mother Nature hit the pause button on tropical formation. Matthew Rosencrans, lead hurricane forecaster at NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center, a division of NOAA’s National Weather Service said, “Several possible factors contributed to the peak season lull in the Atlantic region. The particularly intense winds and rains over Western Africa created an environment that was less hospitable for storm development.”

But, strangely, at the time tropical activity should have been tapering off, we saw record-setting activity.

“Twelve named storms formed after the climatological peak of the season in early September. Seven hurricanes formed in the Atlantic since September 25 — the most on record for this period,” said the NHC.

Record Setters

Hurricane Beryl was the earliest Cat 5 storm on record for the Atlantic Basin.

Cat 4 Helene became the deadliest since Katrina in 2005. It caused more than 150 direct fatalities, mostly in North and South Carolina. Helene was also the strongest hurricane ever to make landfall in Florida’s Big Bend region.

In late September, Hurricane Helene also marked the first time ever that NOAA’s National Hurricane Center (NHC) forecasted a system to become a major hurricane before it became a tropical depression or tropical storm.

Hurricane Milton’s rate of rapid intensification was among the highest ever observed, with a 90-mile-per-hour increase in wind speed during the 24-hour period from early October 6 to early October 7.

Milton’s central pressure dropped to 897 millibars – the lowest pressure for an Atlantic Hurricane since Wilma in 2005.

Storm-By-Storm Summary

The table below shows the dates and maximum winds of each named storm in the Atlantic basin during 2024.

*Name*	*Dates*	*Max Wind (mph)*
TS Alberto	19-20 June	50
MH Beryl	28 June – 9 July	165
TS Chris	30 June – 1 July	45
H Debbie	3-9 August	80
H Ernesto	12-20 August	100
H Francine	9-12 September	100
TS Gordon	11-17 September	45
MH Helene	24-27 September	140
H Isaac	26-30 September	105
TS Joyce	27 September – 1 October	50
MH Kirk	29 September – 7 October	145
H Leslie	2-12 October	105
MH Milton	5-10 October	180
TS Nadine	19-20 October	60
H Oscar	19-22 October	85
TS Patty	2-4 November	65
MH Rafael	4-10 November	120
TS Sara	14-18 November	50

Source: NOAA. TS = Tropical Storm, H = Hurricane, MH = major hurricane.

While the Atlantic hurricane season officially ended on November 30, NOAA satellites continue to keep watch for any developing storms.

NHC reminds us that hurricanes can and do form during any month of the year.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/1/2024

2651 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Appellate Court Dismisses Homeowners’ Claims in SJRA Takings Case

11/30/24 – On November 26, 2024, the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas dismissed homeowners’ claims in the long-running SJRA Takings Case. The case arose from Hurricane Harvey flood damage.

Downstream homeowners alleged that San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) releases from Lake Conroe significantly exacerbated their flooding. The resulting damage, they claimed, amounted to an illegal taking of their property by the government.

Court of appeals dismisses Homeowners' Claims in SJRA Takings Case — *SJRA Takings Case Appellate Ruling*

The Texas Constitution provides that “no person’s property shall be taken, damaged, or destroyed for or applied to public use without adequate compensation.” (Texas Constitution, Article I, Par. 17(a)).

Sadly, the alleged “facts” cited in the Appellate Court’s ruling apparently went unchallenged. And some of those so-called facts may mislead.

Speed of Floodwaters a Major Deciding Factor

The appellate court judges based much of their ruling on an argument related to the speed of floodwaters.

SJRA had produced an expert report by Mark E. Forest. The appellate judges said on page 24 of their ruling that “…the timing [emphasis added] of the water releases and flooding supported the conclusion that the River Authority’s water releases did not cause the homeowner’s flooding.”

The judges continued, “Forest explained that the water from Lake Conroe would take about 30 hours to travel the 38 miles downstream to reach the Humble and Kingwood areas, where most of the homeowners’ properties were located.”

Then, on the same page, comes this pivotal sentence. The judges say,

“About 30 hours after the River Authority first released water from Lake Conroe, the Humble and Kingwood areas had already experienced ‘major flooding,’ as the river levels had already risen from 41 feet above sea level to 62 feet.”
Page 24, SJRA v. Medina

Then the coup de grâce. “This major flooding occurred ‘without any contribution from Lake Conroe since those contributions had not yet arrived’ Forest explained.”

The appellate judges in the SJRA Takings Case evidently bought that argument. At the bottom of Page 24, they said, “Therefore, the River Authority produced evidence that its water releases from Lake Conroe did not cause or exacerbate the flooding of the homeowners’ properties.”

In their conclusion on page 36, the judges also state, “The homeowners’ evidence does not raise a fact issue to refute the River Authority’s evidence. The homeowners have not met their burden to provide evidence showing there is a material fact issue as to the causation of their inverse condemnation claim.”

Basis for SJRA Speed Estimate Unclear

I have asked SJRA repeatedly how they arrived at 30 hours and never gotten an answer. That made me suspicious. The SJRA claims floodwaters move only1.27 MPH (38 miles in 30 hours). An average person can walk 3-4 miles per hour!

Plus, I’ve measured (with my drone) logs floating downriver in lesser floods at 5-6 MPH.

The speed of floodwaters determine their arrival time downstream. Claiming a 30 hour travel time that easily could have been as brief as five or six hours could cause people to focus on the wrong part of the flooding bell curve. And it appears that may be what happened in this case.

Judges Cite Flooding at Less-Than-50-Year Level

I’m not sure what data Forest cited; the judges don’t specify. But let’s assume it came from the gage at the West Fork and US59.

At that location, 62 feet is less than a 50-year flood. Most structures are built at least two feet above the 100-year floodplain. The 100-year flood level there is 64.8 feet – almost three feet higher.

Importance of Speed in Determining Proximate Cause

If you assume a higher rate of speed and correlate that to when floodwaters reached the 100-year level where most homes begin to flood, it’s easier to see a possible connection between the Lake Conroe release and structural flooding downstream.

Floodwaters traveling 5-6 MPH would reach US59 in five to six hours, not 30 hours.

According to the Harris County Flood Warning System, the West Fork reached a 100-year-flood level at US59 at 8:42 PM on 8/28/2017.

And according to an SJRA affidavit supplied during the original trial:

30 hours earlier, SJRA was releasing 10,946 CFS.
6 hours earlier, SJRA released 78,885 CFS.

So, between the 30 hours claimed by the SJRA and the six hours indicated by drone measurement, the SJRA increased its release rate by almost 8X.

If the drone measurements are accurate and representative…

SJRA releases increased dramatically shortly before structures near US59 flooded.

This suggests a different conclusion. SJRA releases may have been a far more proximate cause of downstream flooding than SJRA-supplied data implied.

Would homes and businesses have flooded eventually anyway? Certainly, that’s true for some. But it might not be true for others.

No one would expect a home to flood in Kingwood when you release 11,000 CFS from Lake Conroe.

But how about an additional 79,000 CFS when homes were already on the verge of flooding? That’s a very different story – especially considering that at the peak, Lake Conroe releases comprised one third of the total water coming down the West Fork. Many homes at the periphery of the flooding might have stayed dry had the timing and volume of releases been different.

Too Late Now

The plaintiffs’ expert consultant in the SJRA Takings Case did not conduct his own hydrological modeling (Page 26). That’s unfortunate.

Even if the plaintiffs in this case succeed in getting the Texas Supreme Court to hear an appeal, additional evidence would likely be inadmissible.

In general, appellate courts do not consider new evidence. Their primary role is to review the record from lower courts to determine whether legal errors were made that significantly affected the outcome of the case. Appellate courts focus on issues of law rather than fact.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/29/24

2650 Days since Hurricane Harvey

The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.

New MoCo Drainage Criteria Manual Still Not Finalized

11/27/24 – Montgomery County is operating off a 1989 Drainage Criteria Manual that received minor updates in 2019. MoCo still has not finalized its new drainage criteria manual, a process it began in August 2022.

In February 2024, Montgomery County published a draft of a comprehensive new update to its drainage criteria manual. The draft brought the County’s standards up to date and made them more in line with surrounding areas’ standards.

In April, I discussed the major changes. They included, but were not limited to:

Use of industry-standard modeling software by engineering companies submitting plans
A requirement that new developments produce “no adverse impact” on downstream areas
Mandates to use certain “roughness coefficient standards” for different situations. These determine how models calculate flood peaks.
Stipulations that all projects shall mitigate and attenuate runoff for 5-, 10-, and 100-year storm events
Stormwater detention for all developments regardless of size
A discussion of flood mitigation measures
Identification of entities responsible for maintenance of stormwater detention facilities, channels, etc.
Adoption of Atlas-14 rainfall rates
A minimum detention rate of .55 acre-feet per acre (almost up to Harris County’s rate)
Prohibition of hydrologic-timing surveys (also known as flood-routing or beat-the-peak studies).

For a more complete discussion, see my April post which contains links to the relevant documents. Also see below. After publication of the draft, MoCo sought public comment.

Public Comment Period Remained Open for 10 Months

Since April, I have checked back periodically to see whether MoCo had finalized the new Drainage Criteria Manual after the public comment period.

Until earlier this week, the invitation to make public comments remained up on the county’s website. Most public-comment periods last a month or two. So this was highly unusual.

The MoCo engineering department has had some serious turnover recently. It was caused in part by retirements and the sudden, unexpected death of a County Engineer.

So, I emailed the County Engineer’s office to ask why the public comment period was remaining open so long.

Thomas E. Woolley Jr., Director of Engineering Services, wrote, “Thanks for pointing this out. With all the reshufflings in the department, this was overlooked. We will remove the Drainage Criteria Manual Draft from our website until we are ready to move forward.”

I next asked when they would move forward. Woolley replied that he hoped to get it passed by May 2025. He says that he’s currently focused on a related project – updating development regulations.

Developers Reportedly Recommending Which Changes to Adopt

Reportedly, MoCo is having or will soon have a committee incorporate public comments into the draft Drainage Criteria Manual. Before it could be adopted, the revised document would likely have to go back out for another round of public comment. However, it could also depend on the extent and nature of public comments made on the first draft, which still have not been published to my knowledge.

Most Important Recommendations Likely At Risk

I am told (not by Woolley) that developers comprise the committee. While they are certainly important constituents and their opinions should count as much as anyone else’s, reportedly they are pushing back on the most important recommendations in the first draft.

Those include:

The stormwater detention requirement for all new developments
Elimination of hydrologic-timing surveys.

New developments without sufficient mitigation typically increase the amount and speed of runoff during storms. One hundred percent of the water hitting concrete runs off quickly, rather than soaking into forest floors and wetlands.

To compensate, stormwater detention basins hold back water during a flood. But they cost money to build and they reduce the number of lots developers can sell. They increase developer’s expenses and reduce their income.

Hydrologic-timing surveys are a way some engineers use to exempt their clients from requirements to build detention basins.

In theory, if they show a developer can get runoff to a stream or river faster than the peak of a flood arrives, then the development won’t add to the flood peak…so no detention is required. Hence their nickname, “beat the peak” surveys.

However, in reality, such surveys have faults. According to the previous Montgomery County Engineer, they:

Don’t consider the cumulative effects of other developments.
Almost always rely on outdated hydrologic models
Assume “ideal” storm conditions.

Such surveys encourage developers to get their floodwater to rivers as quickly as possible. That’s exactly the opposite of what you need to reduce flooding.

Only good things come from more detention. But when developers don’t build detention, people downstream can pay the price.

Which Way Will Political Currents Flow?

MoCo commissioners already rejected the elimination of hydrologic timing surveys and mandatory detention requirements in 2019 when they did a minor update to drainage regs developed in the 1980s.

Will they do so again now that more and more of their own residents are flooding? We won’t know for certain until May at the earliest. But it’s pretty easy to see which way the political currents are flowing.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/27/2024

2647 Days since Hurricane Harvey

The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.

Tribute to Judy Cox, A Transformative Community Leader

11/26/24 – Flooding in Harris County could use more people like Judy Cox. I attended her memorial service this afternoon and my eyes misted up when hundreds of people sang, “Down By The Riverside.”

I dedicate this post to Judy’s memory because of her leadership style. She had no real involvement in flood mitigation. But flood mitigation in the Lake Houston Area could certainly use more people like her. And we can learn from her example.

*Judy Cox, an advocate for domestic violence victims. Hundreds of people attended her memorial service today at Good Shepherd Episcopal Church in Kingwood.*

A Transformative Leader

I knew Judy Karns Cox for more than 20 years. On one hand, she was quiet, modest, and self-effacing. On the other, she was a fearless, tireless, transformative leader who made a huge difference in the lives of thousands of Lake Houston Area residents, mostly women and children.

Judy was the retired executive director of Family Time. Family Time runs a crisis and counseling center for battered women. She gave 32 years of her life to the group and 110% of her energies to improving the lives of her clients.

She had an enduring commitment to supporting and uplifting those in need. Perhaps her quiet ways made her successful in her chosen mission. She kept the spotlight on those in need, not herself.

Judy was never pushy, but always pushing.

She took on a job that most would not and became a relentless advocate and educator for her cause.

Judy taught me that the scourge of family violence cuts across all segments of society – rich and poor. Rural and urban. Mainstream and minorities. Old and young. Male, female, LGBTQ+. No group is immune though some are definitely at higher risk.

Judy Cox also taught me that the key to addressing domestic violence lies in recognizing the underlying factors, providing education, reducing stigma, and increasing access to supportive resources and services for all affected individuals.

In that spirit, Family Time provides confidential crisis intervention, counseling, and emergency shelter to survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking.

One Person at a Time

Judy didn’t change the world. But in her quiet way, she changed the lives of thousands of abused people over the years. One person at a time.

As someone who has advocated for flood mitigation since retiring, she was both a hero and a role model to me. I am grateful that I knew her.

The measure of a woman or man is not how much wealth they accumulate in a lifetime. It’s how much better they make other people’s lives and how much they improve their communities. Judy not only understood that, she lived by the principle.

We need more people like her who are willing to throw themselves into the breach and advocate for their respective causes.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/26/24

2646 Days since Hurricane Harvey