City of Houston Archives - Page 14 of 17

Bruce Sprague’s Hurricane Harvey Story, Part VI

I have known Bruce Sprague for 30 years. He has always been a contributor. He flew cargo planes in Vietnam back in the 1970s and was honorably discharged from the Air Force as a Major. Then he captained commercial planes for Continental Airlines. Most recently, he taught military pilots how to transition to commercial aircraft. Like most pilots who live to the age of 73, Bruce follows procedures religiously and always has backup plans to his backup plans. But lately, life has dealt him a series of blows that have left him flying on fumes with only one engine.

*While in the US Air Force and USAF Reserves from 1970 thru 1984, Sprague flew C5s all over the world.*

*Bruce Sprague flew for Continental Airlines from 1978 thru 2006. Here is his most famous passenger in 2001, right after the terrorist attacks.* *Bruce is the pilot standing next to George Bush.*

In 2006, at age 60, FAA regulations forced him to retire from flying. Then in 2008, the financial crisis wiped out a large part of his retirement savings. Next, in 2017, he flooded from Hurricane Harvey. Then the Texas General Land Office (GLO) denied him a grant under the Homeowner Assistance Program (HoAP) because he had already taken out an SBA loan. And most recently, he lost his teaching gig when the airline industry went into a tailspin due to the corona virus; no new pilots needed!

So now, Bruce is trying to regain altitude by appealing the grant rejection, but the GLO is still stalling him.

This is the story of a man who has been 1) forced out, 2) wiped out, 3) flooded out, 4) ruled out and 5) “virused” out.

Despite all that, Bruce has maintained a positive attitude. I’m writing this because he symbolizes, according to a GLO estimate, a thousand other Texans caught in a similar bind.

Waking Up on August 29, 2017, to a Changed Life

Rehak: What happened to you and your home during Harvey?

Sprague: Like most people, we went to bed on the night of August 28th thinking we were safe. But on the morning of the 29th we woke up to find an army of insects marching in front of a what felt like a tidal wave headed toward our house. Soon, the water started creeping in. It eventually reached 25 inches in the house and 30 inches in the garage.

*The Sprague Kitchen on the morning of August 29, 2017 during Harvey*

Rehak: Did you have flood insurance?

Sprague: No. We are in the 500-year flood plain.

Rehak: What happened next?

Reconstruction, Loans and Grant: Start of Even Bigger Problem

Sprague: Luckily, our son in law is in a business that regularly uses lots of contractors. He got people repairing our home right away. And they only charged us cost. No markup. That was the good news. But because of financial losses in 2008, we still had a mortgage and less in our retirement fund than I planned. So we applied for an SBA loan. And they loaned us about $90,000. We also got about $30,000 of individual assistance from FEMA. But the repairs cost $130,000 and that didn’t include contents and replacement of two cars. At any rate, we were able to get back in our house by Christmas, which was close to a record.

*Tearing out wallboard, insulation, cabinets and flooring.*

Rehak: Some time later, HUD Homeowner Assistance grants became available and you applied for one. Did you see anything in the fine print to cause you concern?

Sprague: Yes, there was a clause called “Duplication of Benefits.” It said that if we had taken an SBA loan, we would not be eligible for the grant.

Rehak: Did you ask about that?

Sprague: Yes, the person at the City who processed our application for the General Land Office said that would not be a problem. “Not to worry about it,” she said.

Rehak: So you applied?

Sprague: Yes. We went thru a year long process to fill out forms. We made multiple visits to the HoAP offices, and many, many phone calls and emails.

Loan With Interest Classified Like Grant

Rehak: What happened?

Sprague: They denied us.

Rehak: Why?

Sprague: Duplication of benefits.

Rehak: How is a loan that you have to pay back with interest a “benefit”?

Sprague: Those are their rules. But that wasn’t our only problem. Even though we had receipts totaling $130,000 for repairs, and even though most other people in the neighborhood paid more than $200,000 to repair their homes, the City inspector estimated we only had about $105,000 worth of damage. That reduced the amount of any potential grant.

Not Following Katrina Model

Rehak: When people hear the words “duplication of benefits,” it conjures up images of double dipping and fraud.

Sprague: Right. Had we applied for GRANTS that totaled more than we paid, I would agree with that. But a loan is not a grant. You have to pay it back…with interest. So you’re not defrauding the government unless you default on the loan. Look at it this way.

We had way more in repair costs than the total of our loans and grant. And they’re not even considering a homeowner assistance grant.

That’s just not fair. A lot of people think that, not just me. After Katrina, they allowed people in New Orleans to pay down their SBA loans with homeowner assistance grants. It was NOT considered a duplication of benefits then!

Rehak: So, what did you do next? You’ve worked in and around government for decades.

Crenshaw Rallies Support in Congress and With Trump

Sprague: I went to Congressman Dan Crenshaw. He and his staff have been terrific. He got ten other members of Congress to send a letter to President Trump explaining that SBA loans should not be considered a duplication of benefits. That was not Congress’ intent. Trump agreed and had HUD-leader Ben Carson publish new guidance for duplication of benefits for Harvey. [See Section VB2 on page 28841 of Federal Register.]

But the Texas General Land Office, which was overseeing the distribution of these funds in Texas, still has not changed their rules. They said the new guidance came “too late.” They also said they didn’t have enough money to make grants to people who also had loans. So, Crenshaw pushed an additional $45 million appropriation through Congress.

Rehak: Where does that stand now?

*The belongings of a lifetime on the curb for looters and garbage men to take. Sprague lives in a one-story house.*

Appropriations Bill Stalled In Senate Due to Virus

Sprague: It stalled in the Senate because everyone is focusing on corona virus now. The GLO has not changed its position. They say that even though Congress and the President have clarified their position, “the rules came too late.”

Rehak: That leaves you in limbo. And you’re dealing with two disasters now: Harvey and the virus.

Sprague: I understand that people are just doing their jobs, that they have rules to deal with, and they’re trying to prevent fraud. But it sure is frustrating when the President tells someone in his chain of command, “This is how I and Congress want this to work,” and then people down the line don’t follow instructions.

Rehak: Are you holding out much hope for a grant at this point?

Sprague: No time soon. It’s been more than two and a half years since Harvey. When natural disasters destroy people’s lives and homes, they need help right away, not three or four years later.

Hoping Appeals Last Long Enough

Rehak: Have you appealed?

Sprague: Yes. We’re on our second appeal. Three appeals are possible. We’re hoping we can keep this going long enough for Crenshaw’s appropriations bill to get some traction in the Senate and for the GLO to revise its rules.

Rehak: Is there any hope in the Senate? Have you approached Cruz or Cornyn?

Sprague: I’ve gotten some nice form letters back from them saying they are “working for all Texans.”

Rehak: What do you hope for at this point?

Sprague: I just hope we survive corona so our heirs don’t inherit a mountain of debt with our house. Until now, I’ve never asked anything from my government. I hope just this once they come through.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/4/2020

949 days after Hurricane Harvey

Note: This report for the Congressional Research Service describes issues with the Duplication of Benefits provision.

City Completes Repairs on Tree Lane Bridge, But Concerns Remain

The City of Houston has completed repairs on the Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch…at least for now. The City partially concreted a wing wall and placed riprap in the stream bed to help reduce erosion and scour. However, the root cause of the damage remains. Upstream development without adequate detention is funneling more and more water into Ben’s Branch. The higher volume will continue to contribute to scouring and erosion in major storms unless detention ponds upstream are built and fixed.

Water Under the Bridge

As I struggled to understand what I was looking at, an online search revealed this excellent 196-page, well-illustrated document. It’s titled “AN ILLUSTRATED GUIDE FOR MONITORING AND PROTECTING BRIDGE WATERWAYS AGAINST SCOUR.” Robert Ettema, Tatsuaki Nakato, and Marian Muste from the College of Engineering at the University of Iowa produced it for the Iowa Department of Transportation.

It begins with a maxim: “Person who overlooks water under bridge will find bridge under water.”

The document points out that bridge engineers often assume that a stream channel will maintain its course and dimensions. But most channels adjust their alignment and shape in response to floods and land-use changes in their watersheds. That has happened on Ben’s Branch in recent years.

“Channel changes sometimes have severe consequences for bridge waterways,” say the authors.

Scour and Progressive Degradation

A review of the entire paper reveals two types of destructive forces at work on the Tree Lane Bridge.

Long-term scour is one. It occurs over a time scale of several years, and usually includes progressive degradation and lateral bank erosion due to channel widening or meander migration.

Progressive degradation is another. It features the almost permanent lowering of the river bed at a bridge site owing to changes in the watershed [e.g., head-cut progression (head-cutting), or human activities (e.g., channel straightening or urbanization)].

The area around the Tree Lane bridge supports has been badly eroding for years. A 12-inch water line that was once buried 5 feet below the stream bed is now at the water surface. See below.

*How the area downstream from the bridge looked in December before repairs started.*

Scour and erosion under and around bridges are constant problems for engineers. This bridge is a great example. Any time a structure interrupts the flow of floodwater, it creates turbulence (vortices in the flow) that can lead to erosion.

From “AN ILLUSTRATED GUIDE FOR MONITORING AND PROTECTING BRIDGE WATERWAYS AGAINST SCOUR.”

During Harvey, scour destabilized the Union Pacific and US59 bridges across the West Fork. Both had to be replaced for safety.

The Tree Lane Bridge doesn’t appear to be to that point yet. But the heavier load placed on Ben’s Branch by new upstream developments, such as Woodridge Village, Woodridge Forest, and Brooklyn Trails, may be pushing this bridge beyond its design capacity.

*Source: FEMA*. *Bridge constricts water flow (from top to bottom). The pressure of water stacking up* behind the bridge forces the water to accelerate under the bridge, causing erosion and scour. *See below.*

*Major storms in the last four years have eroded a large area immediately downstream from the bridge.*

Concrete and Rip Rap Should Help in Short Term

To address these problems, the City repaired part of a concrete wing wall. They also placed riprap (boulders) downstream from the bridge and below a stormwater drain.

Riprap breaks up the flow of water and slows it down. This reduces erosion and scour.

*Partially concreted wall (left) and riprap at Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch, Kingwood, TX.* *Photo courtesy of COH Public Works.*

*Tree Lane Bridge repairs, Kingwood, TX.* *Photo courtesy of COH Public Works.*

…But Root Causes for Damage Remain

However, problems remain, both here and upstream.

That 12-inch water line could be taken out in the next flood by a tree flowing downstream. If the flood lasts for several days as it did during Harvey, the loss of water would be a major inconvenience to the residents of Bear Branch.
Inadequate detention upstream will continue to erode both the stream banks and bed at accelerating rates.

Until we can address the root causes of such damage, I fear that maintenance on this bridge will be a constant, long-term issue…despite the City’s best intentions.

*Slabs of concrete still lean against water main.*

*In extreme event, water could still get behind concrete repair and peel it away from bank.*

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/31/2020

945 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.

Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch: Before and After Repairs

Yesterday, I posted about the hidden costs of flooding. Here’s another one: infrastructure repairs. And another one: re-doing infrastructure repairs. Like those to the Tree Lane Bridge over Ben’s Branch.

History of Issue

Upstream development in Montgomery County with insufficient and un-repaired detention pond capacity started dumping excess water into Ben’s Branch. It didn’t take long for the area under the Tree Lane bridge next to Bear Branch Elementary to start eroding badly.

Tree Lane was already a pinch point in the Ben’s Branch floodway. That and the combination of even more water during the Tax Day, Memorial Day, Harvey, May 2019, and Imelda floods all took a toll. The picture below shows what the bridge looked like on December 1, 2019. Hundreds of kids cross this bridge on their way to Bear Branch Elementary every day.

*The Before Shot: Taken November 31, 2019*

After taking the shot above, I emailed it to the City. To their credit, they sent crews out right away to repair it. Heavy equipment sat at the site for 2.5 months.

After the Repairs

About two weeks ago, the last piece left the job site. So today, I drove by to get an “after” shot. See the improvements below.

*The After Shot: Taken 2/29/2020, three months later.*

The City put rip rap across the creek to reduce erosion from water shooting out from the storm sewer in the upper right. They also broke up some of the large slabs of concrete to form additional rip rap.

However, it appears that they:

Have done little to stabilize the bridge supports.
Left slabs of concrete leaning against an exposed pipeline.
Threw a traffic sign and traffic cone into the creek.
Left about 50 bags of sand on the large slab at the left.

Someone else could have dumped the construction materials and sign. Crappy looking areas always encourage illegal dumping.

*Enlargement of detail from previous shot showing sand that has been left behind or dumped.*

I’m guessing that the rip rap may help reduce erosion from the storm sewer. But…

I see little here to stop erosion from upstream of Tree Lane or reduce danger to the pipeline. More important, the City did nothing to increase conveyance under the bridge.

*The Tree Lane Bridge still forms a pinch point that restricts conveyance of Ben’s Branch.*

Of course, the City may handle the conveyance issue in a second job. That could help build a case for doubling those drainage fees.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/29/2020

914 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Exact Text of Lake Lowering Policy Adopted by SJRA

This morning, the San Jacinto River Authority put out a press release about the seasonal lowering of Lake Conroe. I reported the results of the board vote last Friday. The elements of the policy in this press release do not differ. Regardless, I’m printing this press release verbatim for two reasons: a) its the official version, and b) I want the historical record to be complete. I have four comments on the official wording below the release.

*Kingwood Town Center Apartments after Lake Conroe release during Harvey*. *For reference, that’s the roof of an SUV in the foreground and the Town Center Apartments are more than a mile from the river.*

SJRA Board of Directors Recommends Renewing Flood Mitigation Strategy

Conroe, Texas—San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) Board of Directors last week approved a recommendation to the City of Houston (COH) to continue a temporary flood mitigation program at Lake Conroe. The board’s vote proposed extending the initiative through December 2022 and serves as a recommendation to the City of Houston who owns the majority of the water rights in Lake Conroe.

At the special board meeting, over 100 constituents voiced their opinions on the initiative to reduce water level in Lake Conroe on a seasonal basis to create extra capacity to catch rainfall and storm water runoff. During the meeting SJRA Director of Water Resources and Flood Management, Chuck Gilman, gave a presentation to the board that included 20 years of rainfall and lake level data for consideration.

After approximately five hours of presentation, public comment, and board discussion, the SJRA Board of Directors approved the following recommendation to the COH regarding the operation of Lake Conroe:

Spring strategy: Beginning April 1, release only an amount of water from Lake Conroe to create a one foot capacity to catch rainfall and storm runoff (from 201’ mean sea level to 200’ msl). Recapture of lake level beginning June 1.
Fall strategy: Beginning August 1, release only an amount of water from Lake Conroe to create a one foot capacity to catch rainfall and storm runoff (from 201’ msl to 200’ msl). After September 1, increase capacity an additional six inches (from 200’ msl to 199.5’ msl). If a named storm is predicted to impact our region, the COH may initiate an additional release of six inches (to 199’ msl) by notifying SJRA in writing of their call for release. Recapture beginning October 1.
All releases come from the COH’s 2/3 share of permitted water supply in Lake Conroe at the city’s request. SJRA staff to coordinate with COH staff on the details and timing of any releases.
If the lake level of Lake Conroe has already dropped to the target elevation due to natural evaporation, no releases should be made.

The strategy of temporarily creating capacity in Lake Conroe on a seasonal basis began in 2018 to provide flood mitigation benefits for regional downstream constituents in both Montgomery County and Harris County by catching rainfall and runoff in Lake Conroe.

The COH supports the strategy. Mayor Sylvester Turner notified SJRA the day before the special board meeting that the city wished to extend the initiative until the completion of additional dredging and construction of flood gates on the Lake Houston Spillway.

Lake Conroe was built in the 1970s as a partnership between COH, SJRA, and the Texas Water Development Board as a water supply reservoir for the region. COH owns 2/3 of the water rights in Lake Conroe; SJRA owns 1/3. The City of Houston may call for the release of water from Lake Conroe for the city’s use at any time. Upon release, the city’s water flows down the west fork of the San Jacinto River eventually ending up in Lake Houston for use by Houston.

One of the major river authorities in Texas, SJRA’s mission is to develop, conserve, and protect the water resources of the San Jacinto River basin. Covering all or part of seven counties, the organization’s jurisdiction includes the entire San Jacinto River watershed, excluding Harris County. For additional information on SJRA visit our website at www.sjra.net, like SJRA on Facebook@SanJacintoRiverAuthority, follow us on Twitter @SJRA_1937, or find us on Instagram @sanjacintoriverauthoritysjra.

Observations about Curious Wording Within the Release

I found several things interesting about nuances of the language in this press release.

First, the headline talks about renewing the lake lowering policy, not modifying, tweaking, changing, or revising it.

Second, they characterize what they did as a recommendation to the City of Houston, as if it is not the policy that they officially adopted over the City of Houston’s recommendation.

Third, they omitted mention of the difference between the City’s recommendation and the SJRA’s.

Fourth, they omitted any mention of affected residents who live outside of the City, but inside the West Fork watershed. For instance, approximately a dozen residents testified from River Plantation on behalf of the hundreds who flooded there. Woodloch and other Montgomery County communities upstream from the Lake Houston area also experienced severe flooding. More than 1100 homes on the West Fork flooded during Harvey between Kingwood and Lake Conroe.

Fifth, in the last paragraph, the SJRA omitted flood prevention in the boilerplate about their mission! Their enabling legislation clearly included it. The governor recently reconfirmed it. And it was the reason for months of debate that consumed two communities. While the omission may seem trivial, it speaks of an entrenched attitude. I trust the State Sunset Commission will consider that during its review of the SJRA’s performance this year.

Posted By Bob Rehak on 2/26/2020

911 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Forest Cove Townhome Buyouts 80% Complete, But Area Now Magnet For Illegal Dumping

Eighty percent of the Forest Cove townhomes south of Hamblen on Marina and Timberline Drives have been bought out so far. But while HCFCD scrambles to complete the remainder of the buyouts, the area has become a magnet for illegal dumpers.

Vacant Since Harvey

Ever since Hurricane Harvey when 15-20 feet of water swept through the riverfront townhomes, they have been abandoned. Then they were looted, burned, covered with graffiti, and dumped on. No one lives there anymore. They can’t. The Harvey flood destroyed them beyond repair.

The absence of residents has now made the once-proud townhomes a favorite destination for illegal dumpers.

Pictures from February 13 Flyover

Below are some pictures I took from a helicopter on 2/13/2020. Believe me, it looks and smells much worse from the ground. People have dumped old furniture, electronics, a boat, tires, landscaping debris, mattresses and more.

The City can’t keep up with it.

Status of Buyouts

The City of Houston is responsible for keeping the area clean. But Harris County Flood Control District HCFCD is buying these properties out.

Matt Zeve, Deputy Executive Director of HCFCD, says HCFCD has purchased 80% of the townhomes since Harvey. Fourteen units remain un-purchased.

HCFCD has already demolished eight of the buildings. Seven remain. The 14 units are scattered among those seven buildings. That’s why they haven’t been demolished yet.

Of the 14 units, five are in the acquisition process. The nine remaining owners have all volunteered to be bought out. “We’re in the approval process of adding them to our Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) buyout grant,” said James Wade of HCFCD. So all the pieces of this puzzle are falling into place.

A FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) resulting from Hurricane Harvey is partially funding this acquisition. Seventy-five percent of the cost is from a federal HMGP grant and 25% (plus some relocation costs) will be funded by HCFCD. The total estimated costs of the townhomes once complete: approximately $5 million.

HCFCD hopes to complete all acquisition and demolition by the end of 2020.

When buyouts are complete, this area will revert to nature. It could also become part of a linear park. The Houston Parks Board was considering building a hike and bike trail south of Hamblen between the County’s planned Edgewater Park and River Grove Park.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/25/2020

910 Days after Hurricane Harvey

City of Houston Releases “Living With Water™” Report

More than 850 days after Hurricane Harvey, the City of Houston has released a 170-page report called Living with Water™. (Caution: 60-meg download.)

A Primer on Green Flood Mitigation

In many ways, Living with Water is a primer on flood mitigation in the Bayou City. It lays out many of the problems we face as a region. It also points to many innovative solutions. It even takes three neighborhoods within the City (Greenspoint, Kashmere Gardens, and Independence Heights) and shows how various “green” strategies could reduce flood risk.

So far, nothing to argue with. The primary value of Living with Water lies in raising awareness of opportunities that can be used to solve problems throughout the region.

High-Level Ideas with No Actionable Plan Yet

But if you were looking for specifics – case studies, costs, plans, timetables, and budget line items associated with recommendations – you will be sorely disappointed. This isn’t that kind of report. And the absence of those specifics 887 days after Harvey will frustrate many who believe we should be far past brainstorming at this point.

Living with Water contains many magic-wand solutions that people in workshops often develop.

For instance, they identified “cooperation” as a strategy. Yet they failed to identify how to get upstream interests to factor downstream impacts into their development costs willingly.

From 2001 to 2016, most new development took place outside the Houston city limits. Yet during the first two decades of this century, the region added approximately three million people, nearly doubling in size. This creates development pressure in low-lying and risky areas that can impact downstream areas.

Another example: the creation of “interceptor streets.” They are never fully defined, but have something to do with storing stormwater under historic streets. Ten years after the implementation of the drainage fee, have we had one such project developed anywhere in the City?

Finally: a recommendation to “Bring back the prairie.” Great. Now how?

The Benefit: A Shared Vision of the Future

Regardless, it’s important that we share a possible vision of the future if we are ever to agree politically on solutions. Living with Water paints a positive vision of what that future could be. It also provides many tangible examples of how we could get there.

In the end, people will remember Living with Water for one thing. It shows how we could turn stormwater from the enemy into a series of amenities that enrich City life.

Whether this effort turns into reality or “credenza-ware” will depend on how quickly the City can implement pilot programs that demonstrate practical, achievable, cost-effective, flood-reducing benefits.

Posted by Bob Rehak on February 2, 2020

887 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Mouth Bar Dredging: First Pictures of Next Phase

Earlier this month, the State, Harris County and City of Houston announced the next phase of West Fork mouth bar dredging. Late last week, it got underway in earnest.

*West Fork mouth bar on Monday 1.20.2020 before mechanical dredging started.*

How Mechanical Dredging Works

Rachel Taylor took the ground-level pictures below earlier today from her back yard in Atascocita Point. They show mechanical excavators eating away at the mouth bar and loading the spoils on barges.

*Sunday afternoon, 1.26.2020, two mechanical excavators worked the western end of the mouth bar. They loaded the spoils on waiting barges (right). Photo courtesy of Rachel Lavin Taylor.*

*Service boats then pushed the barges upriver. Photo courtesy of Rachel Lavin Taylor.*

*Barge loaded with spoils passes the Deerwood Country Club.* *Photo courtesy of Rachel Lavin Taylor.*

*Barges then anchor at Berry Madden’s property on the south side of the West Fork opposite River Grove Park.* *That black object jutting into the photo from the lower left is the skid of the helicopter.* *Photo taken 1.20.2020.*

*From there, other trucks move the spoils inland.* *For orientation, that water tower in the upper left is south of Kings Lake Estates.* *Photo taken 1.20.2020.*

Mechanical dredging is slower and more labor intensive than hydraulic dredging, but can mobilize faster. In hydraulic dredging, dredgers pump the spoils to a placement area via pipelines. That is faster, but has higher overhead. It also creates more noise.

Hydraulic Dredging Options

The hydraulic pipelines can stretch miles. In the case of the first phase of West Fork mouth bar dredging, they stretched 10 miles upstream. It took five booster pumps to get the material all that way to a sand mine on Sorters just south of Kingwood Drive.

Luckily for us, the pipe from the first phase of mouth bar dredging is still at the Army Corps dock opposite Forest Cove.

*Pipe from the first phase of mouth bar dredging still sits at the former Army Corps command post and could be rewelded into longer sections if needed.*

*The Great Lakes Dredge also remains at the dock. Here you see the pieces below and behind the crane.*

At some point in this project, dredging may switch from mechanical to hydraulic. The fact that the Great Lakes dredge remained here bodes well. It chewed through 500,000 cubic yards of debris at the West Fork mouth bar in less than three months. Officials expect mechanical dredging of 400,000 cubic yards to take 8 -12 months.

Additional Dredging Targets and Financing

Other targets reportedly include the East Fork Mouth Bar and several mouth bars that have formed at the mouths of ditches or streams leading into the lake.

State Representative Dan Huberty helped bring $30 million to this phase of dredging via an amendment to SB500 in the last legislature. That money will funnel through Harris County via the Texas Water Development Board. The County also included $10 million in the 2018 flood bond. And the City is applying $6 million left over from a FEMA/TDEM grant for debris removal from Harvey.

For more details on this next phase of dredging, see the previous post on this project.

Two Phase Project Outlined In Grant

Harris County’s proposal for the grant from the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) calls for splitting the project into two phases.

Phase One will focus on the West Fork Mouth Bar using the City’s $6 million and $10 million from the TWDB grant.
Phase Two will focus on the East Fork Mouth Bar using the remaining $20 million from the grant.
The $10 million from the County flood bond will fund surveys, formulation of specs, bidding, project management and more.

Progress Result of Pulling Together

All this is great news for the Lake Houston Area. The entire community worked since Harvey to make this happen through all levels of government.

As we look at other flooding problems in the area, it’s important not to get discouraged and to remember that we can make progress if we all pull together.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/26/2020 with photos from Rachel Lavin Taylor

880 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Lake Conroe Association Misleads Area’s Own State Representative and Senator

The problem with incendiary lies: once you start them, they’re hard to stop. In its initial meetings with area residents, the Lake Conroe Association (LCA) told people that West Fork dredging was done. Therefore, said the LCA, the SJRA should stop the temporary seasonal lowering of Lake Conroe.

Lie Takes on Life of Its Own

People believed the lie. They started putting up web sites and YouTube videos to spread the word. Soon, the lie took on a life of its own. And it became impossible for the LCA to stamp it out – even if they were so inclined, which they aren’t.

Residents started writing their state reps. And soon Will Metcalf who represents the Lake Conroe Area took up the cry. See the letter below dated Jan. 6.

A week before Representative Metcalf sent this letter to the SJRA Board, the City of Houston pulled the trigger on the next phase of West Fork dredging. It will start this week, says the City. Now, Metcalf doesn’t just have egg on his face; he has a whole omelette. Made from stale eggs and rancid ham.

State Senator Robert Nichols wound up with the same omelette on his face.

Whole Series of Lies, Half-Lies and Logical Fallacies Spread by LCA

The LCA fueled this whole sad, sorry food fight that embarrassed their own representatives with an entire a SERIES of lies, half-lies and logical fallacies that it fed to unknowing people.

For instance, in addition to “the dredging is done”, I see and hear these comments constantly:

Because the East Fork flooded during Imelda and Lake Conroe didn’t release water, that proves we don’t need to keep lowering Lake Conroe.
The Lake Conroe release during Harvey comprised only 5% of the water going through Lake Houston.
All of Kingwood was built in a flood plain. Kingwood people should just move to higher ground.
Kingwood’s flooding problems come from upstream developers.
No scientific study supports the lowering policy.
Lake Houston wants to make the lowering of Lake Conroe permanent.
They should lower Lake Houston.

For the Record…

To set the record straight:

West Fork dredging is NOT done. Just the portion FEMA paid for.
The East Fork and West Fork are in different watersheds. Imelda affected the East Fork, but not the West. Plum Grove got 33 inches of rain while Lake Conroe got two.
The Lake Conroe release during Harvey comprised ONE THIRD of the water coming down the West Fork where approximately 80-90% of all the damage occurred in the Humble/Kingwood area.
All of Kingwood was not built in a flood plain. For instance, 110 out of 250 of my neighbors in Kings Forest were not in a flood plain yet still flooded. We live more than TWO MILES from the river.
Some of Kingwood’s flooding problems come from upstream developers. But that’s a separate issue; they have nothing to do with West Fork flooding due to Lake Conroe releases.
The SJRA did commission an engineering study that supported lowering Lake Conroe.
Lake Houston IS and HAS BEEN lowered…longer than Lake Conroe.
No responsible/knowledgeable person that I know in the Lake Houston area is talking about making the lowering of Lake Conroe permanent.

To correct some of these misperceptions, I met the president of the LCA last year for a whole day. More recently, I spent an hour on the phone with him. I thought I had corrected these misperceptions. But they keep recurring. This is NO accident; this is intentional.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/8/2020

862 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 111 since Imelda

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

Kingwood Residents Go One on One with Flood Experts; Huffman Up Next

Yesterday’s open house at the Kingwood Community Center seemed to be a hit. The SJRA, City of Houston, Harris County Flood Control and Montgomery County – all partners conducting the San Jacinto watershed study – had the subject-matter experts actually conducting the study there. The open house format gave residents a chance to interact with them one on one, tell their flood stories, and discuss possible mitigation scenarios.

Difference Between Listening and Learning

As one resident said, “I got more from 45 minutes here than a dozen town hall meetings.” I appreciate the town hall meetings, but he was right.

Quality one-on-one interaction made the difference between listening and learning.

I suspect the professionals there felt the same way. They came seeking input and they got it.

It felt like a collaboration, not a presentation.

For example, I got to quiz Adam Eaton, one of the engineers working to add more gates to the Lake Houston Dam. Finding hard information about this project has been difficult. But Mr. Eaton provided it. See budget, timeline and project milestones below.

*Budget, timeline and project milestones for Lake Houston Dam Spillway Improvement Project.*

Engineers hope to finish design and receive environmental approval by mid-2020. From there, TDEM and FEMA will review the plans and then hopefully release funds for construction. I asked Mr. Eaton whether there was a chance construction could NOT be approved. Answer: It’s possible, but very unlikely.

Details in Big Picture Context

I also talked at length with Matt Zeve, deputy executive director of Harris County Flood Control. Zeve, who has studied channel hydrology all his life, helped me understand why upstream communities don’t automatically benefit from projects that decrease downstream flood levels. He also helped me understand big picture issues, some of which weren’t even on my radar yet. For instance, how the extension of Highway 99 could affect flooding in Liberty County and on the East Fork twenty years from now.

David Parkhill, an author of the Brown & Root report published in 2000 was there, too. They called it a Regional Flood Protection Study back then. But it had the same objectives as the SJR Master Drainage Plan: to identify flood mitigation projects that will make a difference. Mr. Parkhill helped put the current effort in historical context. He was both fascinating and helpful!

Huffman Meeting on Thursday, 3-7:30 at May Community Center

If you missed the Kingwood meeting on Tuesday, I urge you to attend the Huffman meeting tomorrow. It will have all the same information and experts that the Kingwood meeting had. And it will be your last chance to visit an open house in this area until the next round of public comments next Spring.

The quality of input you give in this process will determine the quality of output you get.

Thursday, December 19, 2019
3:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
May Community Center
2100 Wolf Road
Huffman, Texas 77336

The open house will include information about the following projects, studies, and efforts:

San Jacinto Regional Watershed Master Drainage Plan
Kingwood Area Drainage Analysis
Huffman Area Drainage Analysis
Spring Creek Watershed Planning Study
Luce Bayou Watershed Planning Study
Willow Creek Watershed Planning Study
Jackson Bayou Watershed Planning Study
Cedar Bayou Tributary Analysis
SJRA-led Projects
City of Houston-led Projects
Harris County Permit Office
Harris County Engineering Department – Recovery and Resiliency Division
Hurricane Harvey Repair Efforts
Information about services provided by Harris County Flood Control District, Harris County and Montgomery County

The open house will last from 3:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. The format lets attendees arrive and participate at their convenience. No formal presentation will be made.

Provide Input on Master Drainage Plan

You can comment on the plans at the meeting in Huffman and throughout the duration of the study.

If you can’t attend in person, mail comments to:

Harris County Flood Control District
9900 Northwest Freeway
Houston, Texas 77092
Attn: San Jacinto Regional Watershed Master Drainage Plan

Alternatively, you may submit comments online.

For more information about the San Jacinto Regional Watershed Master Drainage Plan, visit www.sanjacstudy.org.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/18/2019

841 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 90 since Imelda

Luce Bayou Interbasin Transfer Project Construction Photos

Most people have heard about the Coastal Water Authority’s Luce Bayou Interbasin Transfer Project. But few have seen it. Its size makes it impossible to see from the ground. It stretches from the Trinity River to the northeast corner of Lake Houston, where Luce Bayou enters the East Fork. The purpose of the project: to provide additional surface water supplies to end users that utilize water from Lake Houston, especially the new Northeast Water Purification Plant.

Surface Water Capacity to Manage Growth and Fight Subsidence

Studies have shown that Lake Houston and the new plant cannot meet future demand at their current capacity. Transfer of additional raw water supplies to Lake Houston will support future expansion of treatment capacity at the northeast plant and the mandatory conversion from groundwater to surface water to help reduce subsidence.

The City will eventually transport 500 million gallons per day from the Trinity river to Lake Houston through the pipelines and canals you see below.

Connecting Trinity and San Jacinto Watersheds

The Luce Bayou Interbasin Transfer project includes the Capers Ridge Pump Station (CRPS) located on the Trinity River in Liberty County, 3 miles of Dual 96-inch Diameter Pipelines, and 23.5 miles of earthen Canal System. The pipeline will extend west southwest approximately 3 miles along a geological ridge (Capers Ridge). The pipeline will then outfall into the sedimentation basin at the start of the canal. The canal will outfall into the lower reaches of Luce Bayou, which flows into the northeastern corner of Lake Houston.

Originally, engineers considered using a large part of Luce Bayou itself to transport the water and minimize construction costs. However, environmental concerns nixed that idea. Today, they use only the last few hundred yards of Luce Bayou. But the name stuck.

Construction Photos Taken December 3, 2019

The pictures below start at Lake Houston and go about half way to the Trinity River.

*The last part of the canal outfalls into Luce Bayou and then Lake Houston in the background. Looking southwest.*

*A semicircle slows the water as it comes out of the canal. Note how sediment is already building up.*

*Looking west toward FM2100. Note the drainage swales on either side of the canal.*

*These “teeth” in the concrete outfall structure break up the water to reduce its erosive power.*

From the Trinity to Lake Houston, the entire system is gravity driven. The water is pumped up at the Trinity and then flows downhill all the way to lake Houston. The slope is incredibly precise and minute: only .015%.

*The route contains 22 inverted siphons below drainage features, roads, pipelines and 11 bridges.*

These are not the smallest pipes, but they’re still big enough to swallow pickups. Even larger pipelines near the Trinity contain welded-steel piping with cement mortar lining and polyurethane coating.

*Once past Huffman, the canals wind through farmland.*

*The color of the water is partly a reflection of the sky and partly due to the fact that it has gone through a sedimentation basin to remove sediment before reaching this point.*

*In several places, existing streams go OVER the IBTP.*

*The further east you go, the more finished the canals appear.*

*Another natural stream goes over the canal. The earth blocking the canal on either side of these inverted siphons will be removed before the system goes into service.*

*Three million cubic yards of soil were removed to create these canals. That’s enough to fill up the Astrodome almost twice.*

For More Information About Luce Bayou Interbasin Transfer Project

To see a list of specs and fuller discussion of the project, click here.

To see a technical discussion of inverted siphons, click here.

For a less technical discussion, click here. They’re not all THAT complicated. Hint: you have several inverted siphons in your home, usually under sinks.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/17/2019

840 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Tag Archive for: City of Houston