In fact, there seemed to be twice as many machines as they had then. And there were no lines! Gee, I wonder where all those machines came from and why they actually worked. But I guess we will never know. The county is still fighting to keep those records secret.
The lack of major malfunctions seemed to have everyone in courteous and pleasant moods.
I like the new system – which is actually the old system – where elected officials are in charge of elections instead of appointed screwups with no experience.
Let’s hope our luck holds and the next ten days are like today.
For More Information
A wide variety of information about the election can be found at HarrisVotes.com. For instance:
Remember, we have county-wide voting now. So if by chance, you encounter a long line, you can vote at another location.
And remember to breathe when you check in. In the last election, a number of dead people voted. So, breathing is one of the screening tools now.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/24/2023
2247 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.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Early-Voting-Locations.jpg?fit=1100%2C636&ssl=16361100adminadmin2023-10-24 17:10:162023-10-24 17:37:19Vote: Doors are Unlocked, They Still Have Paper and Machines are Working
FEMA has published two flood-mitigation guides on nature-based solutions showing how communities can develop projects with multiple benefits.
Both are titled “Building Community Resilience with Nature-Based Solutions.” But one focuses on “Strategies for Success.” The other focuses on “A Guide for Local Communities.” Together, they build a case for integrating green and gray solutions to improve resilience.
While geared toward policy makers, planners and flood-mitigation professionals, they will also help community leaders, activists, students and anyone interested in weaving green solutions into flood mitigation, whether on the watershed, community or household level.
These are not technical guides. They focus on high-level benefits and are packed with helpful examples and case studies. The writing is clear, compelling and easy to understand.
“Strategies for Success” Summarized
Strategies for Success is organized around five major themes.
Building strong partnerships
Engaging the whole community
Matching project size with desired goals and benefits.
Maximizing benefits.
Designing for the future.
If you wonder what the term “nature-based solutions” includes, see pages 17-22. They complement gray (engineered) solutions in many ways in many environments.
At the watershed scale, they can include:
Land conservation
Greenways
Wetland restoration and protection
Stormwater parks
Floodplain restoration
Fire management
Bike trails
Setback levees
Habitate management
At the neighborhood or site scale, they include:
Rain gardens
Vegetated swales
Green roofs
Rainwater harvesting
Permeable pavement
Tree canopy
Tree trenches
Green streets
Urban greenspace
In coastal areas, they include:
Wetlands
Oyster reefs
Dunes
Waterfront parks
Living shorelines
Coral reef
Sand trapping
The section about maximizing benefits will help leaders sell such projects to their communities. It contains helpful tips that improve value and case studies that dramatize it.
The guides also come with links to additional resources.
“Guide for Local Communities” Summarized
This guide begins by reprising many of the same solutions mentioned above. Then it quickly moves into three main sections:
Building the business case for nature-based solutions summaries their potential cost savings and non-monetary benefits. They include:
Hazard mitigation benefits in a variety of situations/locations
Community co-benefits, such as ecosystem services, economic benefits, and social benefits
Community cost savings, such as avoided flood losses, reduced stormwater management costs, reduced drinking water treatment costs.
Planning and Policy Making covers:
Land-use planning
Hazard mitigation planning
Stormwater management
Transportation planning
Open-space planning
Implementation includes:
Boosting public investment
Financing through grants and low interest loans
How to incentivize private investment
Federal funding opportunities
Key takeaways include:
Communities that invest in nature-based approaches can save money, lives, and property in the long-term AND improve quality of life in the short term. Other key takeaways are:
The biggest selling point for nature-based solutions is the many ways they can improve a community’s quality of life and make it more attractive to new residents and businesses.
Diverse partners must collaborate.
Scaling up will require communities to align public and private investments.
Many types of grant programs can be leveraged for funding.
I’ll add one more: It’s easier to build these into communities as they are developing rather than retrofit them after the fact.
Local Examples
Regardless, the right combination of green solutions can make a valuable supplement to flood mitigation in every community.
The 5,000 acre Lake Houston Park provides recreational amenities and flood protection to surrounding areas.
Many great examples of a nature-based solutions surround us locally. Look at Lake Houston Park; Kingwood and The Woodlands which have greenbelts and bike trails along creeks; the Spring Creek Greenway; and the Bayou Land Conservancy’s Arrowwood Preserve.
Recreational asset and flood-mitigation project.
Parks like Kingwood’s East End make more great examples. East End preserves wetlands, accommodates tens of thousands of visitors each year, and provides valuable habitat for wildlife.
Interested in getting more projects like this started near you? As a starting point, please share these brochures with leaders in your community. And support local groups seeking to preserve green spaces such as the Bayou Land Conservancy.
Two nights ago I started to hug my wife. “Not tonight,” she said.
“What’s wrong,” I asked. “Headache?”
“No,” she sighed. “Climate change.”
The temperature in the room dropped about 10 degrees.
“I see what you mean,” I said.
Ironically, the next morning, I opened the New York Times to an article by Brooke Jarvis. The title: “Climate Change Is Keeping Therapists Up at Night: How anxiety about the planet’s future is transforming the practice of psychotherapy.”
It began with the experience of one psychotherapist to bring issues into focus. He said that many potential patients are looking for someone to talk to about climate change, only to be told (by others, not him) that they are overreacting.
Climate Psychology Alliance of North America and Eco-Anxiety
Enter stage left a group of about 100 “climate-aware” psychotherapists who call themselves the Climate Psychology Alliance of North America. According to Jarvis, they primarily deal with three types of issues:
Acute trauma of living through climate disasters
Fear of a collapsing future
Psychosocial decay from disruptive changes.
Collectively, they call it “eco-anxiety” or “a chronic fear of environmental doom.”
It’s not clear from the rest of Jarvis’ story whether the psychotherapists have reached any consensus yet about how to treat this emerging malady.
Conflicting Info About Breadth of Concerns
Jarvis cites a nationally representative 2022 survey of more than 1,000 people from Yale and George Mason University. Researchers found that a majority of Americans (64%) say they are at least “somewhat worried” about global warming.
However, Jarvis does not report that the same research also found about 90% of Americans experience no distress at all about global warming.
Should psychotherapists bring climate concerns up even when clients don’t? That’s not clear either.
But the climate psychologists agree that they should validate their clients’ climate-related emotions as “reasonable, not pathological.” The climate shrinks believe they should make clients feel their fear is a “rational response to a world that’s very scary.”
Link between Eco-Reporting and Eco-Anxiety Not Examined
While not denying climate change, I also personally believe the threat may be artificially exaggerated.
The New York Times article does not examine eco-reporting that contributes to eco-anxiety. Some days, I’m afraid to open a newspaper because I may find Republicans can’t elect a speaker…due to climate change. (Just joking.)
Comments on the New York Times article seemed polarized. About half felt eco-anxiety was justified. The other half felt it was manufactured by media.
In that regard, I have previously posted about the Associated Press policy of taking money from foundations with interests in renewable energy to hire 20 reporters who focus on climate change.
Before the Internet undermined local newspapers, news organization sold advertising to generate revenue that paid employees. Ads clearly showed client’s logos. News organizations jealously guarded their editorial integrity; news almost never crossed the line into advertising.
That’s no longer the case. Now, 20 reporters are looking for any way possible to connect random weather events to climate change…using the most tenuous of threads. And if they can’t find one, they say, “So-and-so worries that climate change may make his problem worse in the future.” But they present no real statistical proof.
Not to make light of anyone’s feelings or circumstances, as I scrolled through other headlines this morning, I learned that…
Droughtsmay intensify in the Amazon in the future…due to climate change.
Fewer young peoplemay fish in Alaska in the future…due to climate change.
Such stories are rapidly becoming a parody of themselves. Regardless…
Repetition Makes Claims Rise to Level of Assumed Truth
Through sheer repetition of such claims day after day, people assume their truth. Individual events such as a flood, drought, freeze, heatwave or windstorm may or may not exemplify larger trends. But reports rarely present actual proof they do.
Rather, they quote people who have suffered some kind of weather-related damage and who fear such events may become more common in the future…due to climate change.
Of course, who can disprove the future? That’s pretty safe ground for a reporter.
I asked one of the area’s leading psychotherapists in Houston to review the New York Times article. She replied, “Climate change didn’t come up once in my 40 years of private practice.”
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/22/23
2245 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/IMG_0205-e1698010167513.jpg?fit=1100%2C825&ssl=18251100adminadmin2023-10-22 16:53:292023-10-22 17:46:12Welcome to Climate Psychotherapy
Homebuyers beware. Flood risk is a shifting target.
This morning, I began reading more than 100 pages of legal briefs in the appeal of the upstream Addicks and Barker awards. I could not help but think how hundreds of millions of dollars in losses and untold heartbreak could have been averted with more due diligence on the part of all involved – buyers, developers and the Army Corps.
Background of Case
For those new to the area, Addicks and Barker are two reservoirs on Houston’s west side. The Army Corps built them back in the 1930s to protect downtown Houston and the ship channel. However, the Corps did not buy all the land inside the reservoirs that was subject to flooding. Later, developers started building on that land. And people bought the homes despite the risks.
During Harvey, hundreds of homes built inside the reservoirs flooded. Residents sued the Corps and won. But the Corps is now appealing the case.
In 2022, a judge ruled in favor of the residents and awarded them more than half a billion in damages. The damages included repair costs, replacement of belongings, and compensation for value lost in their property. But facing hundreds of millions of dollars in payouts, the government isn’t giving up easily. It appealed.
The case has taken more than six years to get to this point and it is far from over. No telling what the legal fees have cost both sides. Or whether plaintiffs will ever see a penny.
This should serve as a lesson to everyone buying a home and to their real estate agents, mortgage lenders, and surveyors.
Tools to Help You Avoid Becoming a Flood Victim
Although tools to identify flood risk may not have been commonly available and readily understandable when the plaintiffs bought homes inside the reservoirs, such tools do exist now.
They both show the extent of potential flooding in this area, but each has different strengths. And they show slightly different results. That should raise some cautions if you think of risk as a black-or-white issue.
Use USGS National Map for Elevations, Slopes, Contours
You can layer these maps and vary their transparency. But the real magic of the USGS National Map is in the measurement tool for elevation profiling. Below is an example.
After activating the elevation profile tool, I drew a line from a residential neighborhood inside the Barker Reservoir, across the dam, to an area outside the reservoir. I chose an area in the southwest corner of the reservoir that flooded during Harvey. It showed this.
Note elevation changes on right where line crosses the dam (gray bar). Homes above the gray are inside reservoir.
The red X shows the height of the dam (108 feet) in the elevation profile. The brown area in the elevation-profile box shows the elevation of the dam, homes, streets and drainage channels.
Homes are generally 6-8 feet BELOW the height of the dam. That should be a giant red flag for anyone considering buying a house inside the reservoir.
Next, zooming out, I turned on the hydro layer. The red circle below, indicated the approximate area and location of the map above.
Note how the flood pool of the reservoir extends beyond the entire neighborhood shown above.
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer for Floodplain Information
FEMA actually uses the elevation information from the USGS national map. But FEMA superimposes floodplains to show flood risk in several zones.
Note difference in two maps above in their bottom left corners. FEMA shows some homes inside the reservoir that are outside of mapped flood zones. Aqua = 100-year and tan = 500-year floodplains.
The difference noted above raises an important point. FEMA’s maps are estimates of the probability of unknown future events based on the frequency of extremely rare past events. Those estimates may not have been in effect when the neighborhood in question was built around the time of Tropical Storm Allison in 2001. Maps based on Allison weren’t adopted until around 2007 and are still in effect today.
Harris County Flood Control and FEMA update flood maps periodically when new monster storms come along and surpass past rainfall probability estimates. For instance, FEMA is working on new flood maps based on Harvey, but has not yet released them.
So, if you’re thinking of betting your life savings on a home in a risky area, the best things to do are these:
Ask yourself, “Can I afford to lose everything?” Many families in the reservoirs did.
Consult an independent engineer without any financial incentive in the purchase, i.e., making the deal go though.
Evaluate a variety of homes, not just one. And look closely at the safety margins.
If a home is two feet above the 100-year floodplain, look for one that’s higher. Things change regularly, usually in one direction.
Make “flood avoidance” more important than kitchen appliances in your purchase decision.
A Cautionary Tale Based on Personal Experience
Back in the early 1980s, I owned a house in Dallas near a creek that an engineer and the city certified were 2-feet above the 100-year floodplain. The home flooded within two years, due to rapid, insufficiently mitigated growth upstream.
Several years later, when I bought a house in Kingwood, I looked at ten homes and bought the one on the highest ground. More than 30 years later, all nine of the others flooded during Harvey even though they were all reportedly above the 100-year flood plain.
For a thorough description of why flood risk is a moving target, read this post – Why Do We Flood?
After two years of drought, it’s easy to become complacent about flood risk. Don’t. Ask anyone who has flooded. They will tell you. Your life can change overnight. So homebuyers beware.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/21/2023
2244 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Barker-Hydro.jpg?fit=1200%2C842&ssl=18421200adminadmin2023-10-21 18:33:462023-10-21 18:57:57Homebuyers Beware: Flood Risk is Shifting Target
Harris County Flood Control, SJRA, and the Cities of Humble and Houston using funding provided in part by the Texas Water Development Board are searching for sediment solutions in the Upper San Jacinto River Basin. Their major scientific study includes all or parts of seven counties: Harris, Montgomery, Waller, Grimes, Walker, San Jacinto and Liberty – all land draining into Lake Houston.
From Technical Memorandum 1 of the Upper San Jacinto River Basin Regional Sedimentation Study.
The high-level goal: to better manage sediment in the river basin. Sediment reduces both floodway conveyance and the storage capacity of Lake Houston. Both contribute to the frequency and severity of flooding.
Among other things, the study partners hope to prioritize sediment hot spots so they can develop sediment solutions and recommendations.
I hope they look at Colony Ridge. It exemplifies a major hot spot and points the way to an obvious sediment solution – better enforcement of existing regulations.
Scope and Status of Sediment Study
The study is now about half complete. With much of the fieldwork complete, the partners will next focus on modeling, hotspot identification, area prioritization and sediment solutions, according to Matt Barrett, Water Resources and Flood Management Division Manager atSJRA.
To date, the study has examined a variety of factors:
Sediment Solutions Must Address Development Practices
Erosion occurs naturally. But poor development practices can accelerate the rate of erosion unnaturally.
Regulations in Liberty County call for backslope interceptor swales to prevent sheet flow over the sides of ditches. I have yet to see one such system anywhere in the 30+ square miles of Colony Ridge. What you typically see is this.
All that sediment washes downstream where it reduces the carrying capacity of rivers and the storage capacity of Lake Houston.
Liberty County regulations also call for planting grass on the side slopes of ditches and detention basins. The grass reduces erosion, too. But you don’t see much grass on those side slopes either.
Compare the ditch above with the ditch below in Harris County to see how grass and backslope interceptor swales can reduce erosion.
Small swales behind main slopes capture sheet flow heading toward the ditch. Pipes then take runoff to the bottom of ditch, thus reducing erosion on side slopes.
Here’s Colony Ridge again.
Three-mile-long Colony Ridge drainage ditch has no grass or backslope interceptor swales.
Address the Elephant in the Room Before the Next Disaster
Ironically, both Liberty and Harris County have almost identical regulations for erosion control. Harris County enforces them; Liberty County doesn’t.
Enforcement of development regulations is the elephant in the room.
So, as the SJRA and its partners search for sediment solutions, here’s one simple recommendation. Enforce regulations already on the books.
Colony Ridge and other developments that skirt regulations represent a disaster waiting to happen. Unfortunately, it will probably take a disaster, such as Harvey, to cause leaders to take action. But by then, it will be too late.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/20/23
2242 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.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/20231006-RJR_6038-1.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2023-10-20 14:08:222023-10-20 17:39:42Search For Sediment Solutions Should Lead Straight to Colony Ridge
Ten days ago, the entire Republican Congressional Delegation from Texas asked State Attorney General Ken Paxton to investigate Colony Ridge, the controversial development in Liberty County. Today, he responded with a scathing letter that kicked Colony Ridge criticism up quite a few notches. Paxton also sent the letter to Governor Greg Abbott; Dade Phelan, Speaker of the Texas House; and Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick.
Neighboring communities have also complained about crime, traffic, destruction of roads, and rapidly growing burdens on the Plum Grove Volunteer Fire Department.
Too Much Chaos to be Tolerated
Paxton asks whether a settlement the size of Colony Ridge should have been allowed to grow that large without annexation or incorporation. By some estimates, Colony Ridge now has upwards of 40,000 people. If accurate, that would make it larger than the three largest cities in Liberty County combined!
Paxton says, “…this unincorporated settlement has drawn far too many people and enabled far too much chaos for the current arrangement to be tolerated by the state.” Boom.
Colony Ridge Business Model Caters to Cross-Border Settlement
Then Paxton talks about the business model used by Colony Ridge. “Texas has seen a growing trend of real estate developers buying huge quantities of undeveloped land, creating primitive subdivisions, and selling the bare lots in a practice often paired with offering minimal-down-payment, high-interest owner-financed loans,” he says.
“These loans require little identity verification. Lax development codes for unincorporated areas mean residents can crowd onto a property and the residential population can expand quickly.”
Paxton continues, “This form of real estate development and financing has created an attractive opportunity for noncitizens to cross the border and settle in Texas, with fast-growing developments the size of entire cities forcing nearby areas to struggle to adapt to—and even subsidize—the influx of new residents enriching the developers.
Unmanageable Size
“The scale of the Colony Ridge development has proved unmanageable for effective law enforcement and other key standards of acceptable governance,” he says. “Violent crime, drug trafficking, environmental deterioration, public disturbances, infrastructure overuse, and other problems have plagued the area and nearby towns.”
Distorting the Intent of Municipal Management Districts
In the next page and a half of Paxton’s letter, he details how the developers, with the help of State Senator Ernest Bailes and Senator Robert Nichols, perverted the intent of Texas Local Government Code which deals with the creation of Municipal Management Districts (MMDs).
MMDs were intended to revitalize and beautify already developed urban commercial areas. They were not intended to develop raw land, according to Paxton.
The Colony Ridge MMD controlled by the developer started with 5 acres then annexed tens of thousands of acres – also owned by the developer.
“…the managers of this district function as the unelected, unaccountable leaders of a city that is inhabited by an unknown population including unvetted foreign aliens and whose unsustainable growth is protected by a specific state carve-out,” says Paxton.
“The burden displaced onto the surrounding areas to subsidize public services needed by those residing in Colony Ridge is significant.”
Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General
Criticism of Two Texas Lawmakers
He adds, “I am beyond disappointed in Senator Nichols and Representative Bailes for apparently working to enrich specific developers at enormous expense to the rest of the public and reducing the quality of life for their own constituents.”
“It [Colony Ridge] is a sprawling, highly populated settlement that will soon outpace the population of many cities in Texas yet is ungoverned by any meaningful authority other than the developers whose primary interest is selling more property to new residents.”
Attacks Those Trying to Downplay Colony Ridge Problems
Paxton concludes by attacking journalists and politicians trying to downplay the problems caused by Colony Ridge. He says, “…the people of Texas … never assented to the creation of a sprawling unincorporated, ungoverned zone…”
Paxton does not mention this transaction specifically, but it falls under “enriching developers at the expense of the public.”
Note that the developer runs the MMD mentioned above. Also note how in these MMD board meeting minutes, the developer set the tax rate on his customers, gives his brother a $9.9 million paving contract and approves a reimbursement agreement for “the developer.”
The purpose of an MMD is to promote the public interest. But the developer is using his position as MMD president to defray his own costs. In a transaction that certainly raised my eyebrows, he and his board awarded a contract worth almost $10 million to Liberty Paving, a company controlled by his brother’s T-Rex Management Inc.
The developer has asserted that Colony Ridge is like any other community. All these photos below were taken on 10/6/2023, one day after the developer took several state legislators on a guided tour of the nicer areas in the development near the Grand Parkway – as the northern entrance flooded.
The neighborhood swimming pool.Note tarp for roof and trees growing in another pool.Colony Ridge residents often operate businesses from their homes.
Paxton’s letter points out that in 2019, “the developer insisted extra state funding was needed to accommodate the growth of residents because the area had so little commercial tax revenue.” No wonder those commercial taxes are down.
A backyard AC recycling business? A backyard car repair business?Used car lot in the front yard? Or car rental agency?A Google search says these containers can hold chemicals, food and water.I am not sure what these held but the volume certainly goes beyond the needs of one family. Perhaps someone is smuggling in fresh water.
Next up: Will the Texas legislature take any meaningful action in its special session? Come back soon as the Austin action unfolds.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/19/23
2242 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.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/20231006-RJR_2514.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2023-10-19 16:49:122023-10-19 23:05:15Paxton Letter Kicks Colony Ridge Concerns Up a Notch or Ten
At Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin’s final town hall meeting last night, he and Chief Recovery Officer Stephen Costello gave an update on the status of new, higher capacity floodgates for the Lake Houston Dam. Their talks also addressed dredging and sand traps.
City of Houston Chief Recovery Office Stephen Costello (l) and Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin at Martin’s final town hall meeting on 10/17/2023. Term limits bar Martin from running again for Council, though he is running for City Controller.
According to the latest estimate, construction of the gates now looks like it could begin in mid-2026, barring unforeseen setbacks.
The City has scheduled more dredging for the San Jacinto West Fork south of where the mouth bar used to be. Also, Costello says the City has completed opening up ditches and tributaries north of the railroad bridge and is now starting on those south of it.
Finally, Costello revealed that Lake Houston has lost almost 20% of its capacity due to sedimentation. To receive future dredging grants, the City must take steps to reduce the rate of sediment inflow. Costello revealed plans for a pilot sand-trap project in a point bar outside the Hallett mine far upstream. He said that the mine had agreed to remove trapped sediment there for free. Otherwise, he did not explain why a possibly more effective location closer to the problem area was not chosen for the pilot project.
For more details on each, see below.
Gates Details/Timeline
The purpose of adding more floodgates to the Lake Houston Dam: to lower the lake faster in advance of a flood.
The City must now start to lower the lake so far in advance of a storm that storms can veer away before they arrive. This wastes water.
The existing gates have 1/15th of the release capacity of the gates on Lake Conroe. This makes a joint pre-release strategy virtually impossible in extreme storms.
After examining and discarding the notion of adding crest gates to the spillway portion of the dam, the City is now focusing on adding 11 tainter gates to the earthen portion of the dam (east of the existing gates).
Proposed location for 11 new tainter gates.
With Mayor Sylvester Turner’s help, the City secured enough funding for construction during the regular session of this year’s legislature.
Next steps include:
3/24 – New environmental and historic preservation assessments, Army Corps permitting
12/24 – Construction plans completed
1/25 – Bidding
6/25 – Award Contract
5/26 – Begin Construction
The success of this plan will require the election of a new Mayor and City Council Representative who are committed to the project. Early voting begins next week.
Dredging Volumes, Costs
Dredging at various locations around Lake Houston will likely be a continuous effort for years to come. Sedimentation has already reduced the capacity of Lake Houston an estimated 18%. The City estimates future yearly losses in the range of 360-460 acre feet per year.
Historic and projected capacity loss in Lake Houston due to sedimentation.
One acre roughly equals the size of a football field. So imagine 400 football fields covered with sludge a foot deep. Each year!
To keep this problem in check, the City is already looking at doing additional dredging on the East and West Forks. It and the Army Corps finished major projects in both areas less than four years ago.
East of Atascocita and south of the convergence of the East and West Forks, the City plans to spend another $34 million to remove almost 900,000 cubic yards of sediment.
To date, Costello estimates that dredging nearly 4 million cubic yards of material has cost $186 million.
Summary of dredging costs and volumes in Lake Houston since Harvey
The City hopes to recoup some of these costs by reselling sand that it recovers from “hilltops” in the lake. Costello showed the heat map below. Notice the heavy sediment concentrations in the lake’s headwaters. This is because sediment drops out of suspension where rivers slow down as they meet standing bodies of water.
In addition to reducing the volume of Lake Houston, the sediment also poses a flood threat. It reduces conveyance of the rivers and lake forcing water up and out. Sediment blockages, such as the mouth bar, can also form dams that back water up.
Costello also addressed the ongoing dredging of 17 canals around Lake Houston. He said the focus is now shifting to the southern part of the lake.
Sand Traps to Reduce Inflow
In addition to dredging sediment from the lake, Costello also emphasized the need to reduce sediment coming downstream via sand traps. This last effort may be a condition of future grants for dredging.
Costello described two pilot types of pilot projects that the City is working on with the SJRA and sand-mining industry. The first is “sand traps” dug in point bars outside sand mines. The second: in-channel traps.
The idea behind the traps: dig holes in the river or its sand bars where migrating sand can settle out of the flow before it reaches the lake.
The first project may be near the Hallett Mine on the West Fork. According to Costello, the mine has agreed to remove the sand for free, thus reducing long term maintenance costs.
During Q&A after Costello’s presentation, however, he admitted that the City has no plans to try to get sand mines to reduce illegal emissions. In one notable instance, the TCEQ documented 56 million gallons of sludge discharged into the West Fork by the LMI mine.
Controlling sediment is crucial in reducing flooding. Accumulated sediment reduces storage capacity and conveyance for stormwater. The smaller capacity means lakes and rivers will flood faster and higher.
For high res versions of all the slides shown in the Town Hall, see this PDF.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/17/23
2241 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/20230812-RJR_2234-copy.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2023-10-18 06:47:582023-10-18 15:28:45Update on Floodgates, Dredging, Sand Traps from Martin, Costello
Below I’m reprinting verbatim a press release from FEMA dated 98/6/23. It’s about a new formula for disaster funding. And it creates “Disaster Resilience Zones” that will receive increased federal support. Caution: government euphemisms ahead, including:
“Underserved communities most at risk”
“Socioeconomic status”
“Social vulnerability”
“Social justice”
“Economic justice”
“Disadvantaged communities”
The press release does not mention “damage” or “threats to life” at all. See my editorial comment at the end of this post.
FEMA Press Release
WASHINGTON – Today, FEMA is announcing the initial designation of 483 census tracts that will be eligible for increased federal support to become more resilient to natural hazards and extreme weather worsened by the climate crisis. Congress directed FEMA to make these designations in the Community Disaster Resilience Zones Act of 2022 and implement this bipartisan legislation to help build resilience to natural hazards in communities most at-risk due to climate change.
Designated Disaster Resilience Zones in Houston Area
FEMA will use Community Disaster Resilience Zones designations to direct and manage financial and technical assistance for resilience projects. For example, for federal agencies, the legislation provides additional federal cost-share for projects in designated zones. The zone designations can also help the private sector, nonprofits, philanthropies, and other non-federal partners target investments in community resilience.
The act aims to increase resilience efforts and preventative measures designed to address underserved communities most at risk to natural hazards. Consistent with legislative direction, FEMA considered natural hazard risk from a national and state level while accounting for factors that reflect disaster impacts felt by coastal, inland, urban, suburban and rural communities. FEMA also ensured that each state has at least one Community Disaster Resilience Zone in these initial designations.
“These designations will help ensure that the most at-risk communities are able to build resilience against natural hazards and extreme weather events, which are becoming increasingly intense and frequent due to climate change,” said FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell. “This aligns with Congress’ direction and other FEMA initiatives to get federal support and resources to the communities that need them most.”
This initial set of designations covers all 50 states and the District of Columbia. These designations can be explored on an interactive map on FEMA’s website. Additional information on the designation methodology and criteria is available. More Community Disaster Resilience Zone designations, including tribal lands and territories, are expected to be announced in the fall of 2023.
An additional designation of zones will occur in 12-18 months based on updates to the National Risk Index, lessons learned from these initial designations, and stakeholder input. Examples of planned updates to the National Risk Index include additional data on tsunami and riverine flood risk.
Designated zones will have prioritized access to federal funding for resilience and mitigation projects. For example, this fall, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) will make awards for the Climate-Smart Communities Initiative program funded by the Inflation Reduction Act to accelerate the pace and reduce the cost of climate resilience-building for communities across the United States. NOAA will work with communities to co-develop equitable climate resilience plans that can be readied for funding and implementation. The priority is to assist communities that are at the highest risk to climate impacts and have the most need for assistance, such as the FEMA-identified Community Disaster Resilience Zones.
The vision for the Community Disaster Resilience Zone Act, passed with bipartisan support in December 2022, is to leverage collaboration and cross-sector coordination across all levels of government, philanthropic foundations, private non-profits, universities, the insurance industry and private businesses.
FEMA will continue to engage the public as it refines the natural hazard risk assessment methodology to designate the zones, consults with local jurisdictions and implements post-designation support from a range of public and private resources.
Editorial Comment
Notice that the press release doesn’t mention damage at all. This appears to be much like Harris County’s Equity Prioritization Framework. We saw last weekend how that distorted the distribution of flood-mitigation funds. Let’s hope that by creating “resilience zones,” we don’t also deprive other areas of the help they desperately need.
At US59, Harvey reached more than 20 feet above flood stage, the deepest in Harris County.Almost a quarter of all the flood fatalities in the county happened near here.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/17/23
2240 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Screenshot-2023-10-17-at-10.15.55%E2%80%AFAM-e1697560136356.png?fit=1200%2C639&ssl=16391200adminadmin2023-10-17 12:30:382023-10-17 13:03:05FEMA Adopts New Formula for Disaster Funding
The National Weather Service (NWS) has launched a nationwide rollout of “experimental” flood forecasting maps. The maps show when, where and how much floodwaters will impact specific areas up to five days in advance.
NWS’s new experimental flood inundation maps help communicate the timing and magnitude of high water events by showing modeled inundated areas in blue overlay. Emergency managers may use these services to preposition resources, secure critical infrastructure and recommend evacuations and evacuation routes.
System Already Rolled Out to Houston Area
NWS has already rolled out the system for Houston and East Texas with other parts of the county to follow.
The new system should enable emergency managers to see how predicted rainfall could impact structures, communities and people.
Until now, the best NWS could do was issue a flood watch or warning for communities. But the new maps will show how far floodwaters could spread in a community. That will help people better prepare for floods and evacuate from them. For instance, it will reportedly show when roads will be cut off by rising waters.
However, the new maps can’t yet forecast urban flash flooding related to lack of storm sewer capacity.
Near Real-Time View for Emergency Managers
NWS announced the new experimental flood maps on September 26, 2023. “These new services complement and support the issuance of flood watches and warnings by providing near-real-time, high-resolution, street-level visualizations showing where, when, and how much flood waters are forecast.”
The descriptions conjure up images of floodplain maps. But they show expected flooding from approaching storms – not just the extent of flooding in a hypothetical 100-year event.
David Vallee, director, Service Innovation and Partnership Division, NOAA’s National Water Center said, “These services will dramatically improve our ability to provide impact-based decision support services to our partners so they can preposition people and resources ahead of flood events.”
Three New Tools
Three new near-real-time services will help improve flood impact information. They include:
Hourly Analysis will model flood inundation extent based on streamflow analysis.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/16/23 based on information from NWS
2239 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Screenshot-2023-10-16-at-1.34.08%E2%80%AFPM-e1697481825151.png?fit=1100%2C614&ssl=16141100adminadmin2023-10-16 13:46:262023-10-16 17:26:46National Weather Service Rolling Out New Flood Warning Maps
10/15/23 – Third quarter flood-mitigation spending data is now available for Harris County Flood Control District and its partners. In some ways, the data shows a continuation of previous trends. But the data also contained some surprises. The major findings:
Spending continued to dip. Slower project delivery means inflation will claim an increasingly large percentage of taxpayer dollars and may force cancellation of some bond projects.
If the last quarter of this year is anything like the first three, we could see less than half the activity in 2023 than we saw in 2020.
The trend toward investing more heavily in minority areas continued and even accelerated. But there was one notable exception – Cypress Creek and its tributaries.
An unusual $9.7 million real-estate transaction for a stormwater detention basin near the Mercer Arboretum skewed the Cypress Creek total. That was 16.5% of all HCFCD spending for the quarter.
Without it, many of the numbers below would also have been skewed. For instance, total spending and average spending per watershed would vary dramatically.
The focus on so-called “equity” spending and the Cypress Creek watershed meant 15 watersheds saw less than a million dollars in activity during the quarter. And five of those received less than $100,000.
Let’s look at each and the implications. Everything below INCLUDES the unusual real estate transaction near Mercer. In several places, I note how things would have changed without Mercer.
Overall, Slowdown Magnifies Inflation Concerns
Overall, flood-mitigation spending dipped about 5% in the third quarter compared to the previous quarter. It declined by a little more than $3 million to $58.8 million. That may not sound like much, but it continues a 3-year downward trend and creates delays that expose residents to more flood risk.
As projects are delayed, their costs also escalate due to inflation, raising concerns about whether there will be enough money in the bond to finish all the projects promised to voters.
Spending this year will likely be a hundred million dollars less than the first full year of the 2018 flood bond – when projects were ramping up. See chart below.
Annualized estimate for 2023. 23Q4 data estimated based on average of first 3 quarters.Without Mercer, the 2023 estimate would be below $200 million.
Moreover, spending will be $200 million less than the peak year of 2020 – about half of what it was then.
Halfway through the 2018 10-year flood bond, HCFCD has spent only about a third of the funds approved by voters – $1.65 billion. However, if the present slowdown continues, this will be the third straight year of decline.
The slowdown in project delivery means inflation will increasingly raise costs and undermine the purchasing power of the dollars authorized by voters.
HCFCD acknowledges the serious impact of inflation in its latest bond update to Commissioners Court, and hopes toll-road money remaining in the Flood Resilience Trust will cover any shortfall.
Average Spending in LMI Areas Growing
Data also reveals that with one exception (Cypress Creek and its tributaries), the trend of preferentially allocating funds to Low-to-Moderate-Income (LMI) areas continued and even accelerated when measured by average spending per watershed.
On average during Q3, watersheds with a majority of LMI residents (hereinafter called “LMI watersheds”) received 2.5X more funding than more affluent watersheds – $3.1 million each vs. $1.2 million. That’s up from 1.7X over the longer period since Harvey. So, the gap is widening.
Without the Mercer real-estate transaction, the average for more affluent watersheds would have been cut in half to $600,000. That would have almost doubled the ratio. The recomputed average would created a 4.7X ratio between LMI and all other watersheds for the third quarter.
That trend will likely continue for some time as projects funded by HUD through the Texas General Land Office get approved and start construction. That pot of money will spread across the income spectrum, but projects in lower income areas will likely start first.
Cypress Creek Spending Explodes
In fifteen Harris County watersheds, more than 50% of residents make above the average income for the region.
As a group, those 15 received $18.6 million last quarter – $2 million more than the $16.6 million received by the eight LMI watersheds.
However, the first group is twice the size of the second. And looking deeper within the more affluent watersheds, we can see that Cypress Creek and its tributaries (Willow and Little Cypress) received 79% of that $18.6 million last quarter.
The three Cypress watersheds received almost 4X more funding than the 12 other watersheds in the more affluent category put together.
Cypress Creek and its tributaries consumed 79% of all HCFCD/Partner spending last quarter among watersheds without a majority of LMI residents.
Here’s how that same spending looks in a bar graph.
Only the first three watersheds on the left received more than a million dollars in Q3.The twelve on right received less than $1 millioneach.
The 12 other watersheds divvied up $3.8 million; they averaged just $348 thousand each.
FOIA request. Data supplied by HCFCD.
$348,000 is one ninth of the $3.1 million average for LMI watersheds. And we know that some of those, such as the San Jacinto, have huge, unmet needs.
Cypress Knocks Brays Out of First Place
Now, let’s look at ALL watersheds in both categories. When looking only at the third quarter, Cypress Creek surged into first place. It nudged out Greens, White Oak, Brays and Sims, all of which have LMI populations greater than 50%.
Includes all 23 watersheds during 23Q3.
HCFCD finished Project Brays 15 months ago, but still managed to spend $3.8 million there last quarter. That was almost 10X more than it spent during the third quarter in the San Jacinto watershed, the county’s largest, and where the flooding was deepest. HCFCD spent only $400 thousand in the entire San Jacinto watershed last quarter.
Comparison of 33 gages in Harris County during Harvey showed San Jacinto had worst flooding.
Brays Still Ranks #1 in Total Spending Since Harvey
Since Hurricane Harvey (not just last quarter), Brays still ranks #1. But Cypress now ranks second. If you added its Little Cypress and Willow Creek tributaries in the graph below to the Cypress Creek total, they would rank #1 by more than a $100 million.
Includes all 23 watersheds since Harvey
Brays even managed to increase in the last quarter by $1.5 million while the San Jacinto decreased by $55,000.
Granted, some watersheds have smaller needs than others, but the ratio between the highest and lowest spending exceeds 300X.
Impact of Equity Formula
The spending priorities shown in this post reflect the Equity formula adopted and periodically revised by Harris County Commissioners Court.
Ironically, the language approved by voters in the flood bond never mentions the word “equity.” Paragraph 14G does say that Commissioners Court shall provide for an “equitable expenditure of funds.”
The theory is that poor people are financially less able to fix their homes after a flood. I accept that.
But some commissioners are using that to push the idea of fixing 500-year flooding in poor neighborhoods before fixing 2-year flooding in more affluent communities.
Therefore, I ask:
At what point do we do we say enough money has gone into an LMI watershed and start spending elsewhere to reduce greater flood risk?
Why isn’t HCFCD publishing updated flood risk maps as it completes mitigation projects so we can make objective comparisons and see what our tax dollars bought?
Why does Harris County’s formula for allocating flood-mitigation funds NOT consider:
Flood damage to homes, businesses and retirement communities?
Damage to infrastructure, such as bridges, schools, hospitals, grocery stores, traffic arteries, water and sewage treatment plants, etc.?
Height of floodwaters, i.e., the severity of flooding?
Deaths caused by floods?
Is a poor person’s carpet worth more than a rich person’s life?
Will there be enough money in the flood bond and flood resilience trust to finish all projects in the bond given inflation?
Only 20% of Americans now say they trust government “just about always or most of the time.” That’s something to think about as we near the next election.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/15/23and updated 10/16/23 with additional info on Cypress Creek
2238 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.
