Tag Archive for: City of Houston

Homes That Didn’t Flood Because of Quick Action: Example of How to Reduce Flood Risk

Coordinated, fast action by the City, Harris County Flood Control, and concerned citizens reduced flood risk for many homes earlier this month. Together, they eliminated many blockages in drains and ditches that likely prevented many homes from flooding during the storms from May 3 through May 10. Perhaps we can learn from the experience and organize neighborhood groups that spot and report developing situations before they get out of hand and cause floods. Here’s what happened.

Triple Whammy: Three Major Storms

On Friday, May 3, late in the afternoon, heavy rains combined with high winds and possible tornadoes downed trees throughout Kingwood. Tree debris littered the ground everywhere. The City worked throughout the weekend to clear streets and drains. But large amounts of debris remained in yards and along greenbelts.

Then on Tuesday, more intense rains hit and flushed much of that debris into drains and ditches.

  • The City again sprang into action; Public Works sent crews out to inspect the storm drains for blockages. Camera and clean up crews have been here ever since.
  • Harris County Flood Control also sent crews out to clear ditches. Due to erosion and high winds, many trees had fallen into the ditches and were creating blockages.

Sadly, many homes did flood on Tuesday. The vast majority of those were near a massive construction site that altered drainage.

But had it not been for fast, coordinated action by the City, County and Citizens, many more homes elsewhere might have flooded on Friday, May 10, when Round Three of heavy rains hit the Lake Houston Area.

Example of How Things Can Go Right

Jennifer Coulter, a Kings Forest resident, reported a small creek totally blocked behind her home. The Coulters flooded badly in Harvey and have been hyper vigilant ever since. Jennifer detected a blockage in the ditch behind her home AFTER Tuesday’s storm on May 7. Here’s what it looked like. Harris County Flood Control sent a team out to clear the blockage BEFORE the Friday storm.

This bridge over a small ditch/creek in Kings Forest had become totally blocked in the previous storms.
Another view of the same ditch showing extent of blockage.
Wide shot illustrates how water would have been forced out of the ditch during a storm because of the blockage. Once blocked, additional debris can quickly pile up, making things even worse.

When notified, HCFCD immediately dispatched a crew. They managed to clear the blockage before the next storm hit. It took about an hour. Here’s what the same ditch looked like when they left.

Free flowing on both sides

A Minor but Important Success

I emailed Coulter after the Friday storm to see how she did. Her response: “Dry here.  Looked like the backyard drained well, too.  Huge sigh of relief from this address!”

This wasn’t the only success story before Friday’s rains. I’m aware of at least five similar blockages removed before the storm. No homes flooded near those areas that I am aware of…at least as a result of reported blockages.

That’s not to say that no homes flooded anywhere. I am sure some did and that is tragic. But this example underscores the need for better identification of issues and coordination in communicating them.

Importance of the Right Five

Management consultants often talk about the “Right Five” as a key element of success. Success happens when the Right People, get the Right Information, at the Right Time, at the Right Place, in the Right Format.

In this case, residents knew:

  • The Right People to contact (Flood Control, not the City, and the right people AT Flood Control)
  • The Right Information to give them (description of problem so they could send crews with the right equipment, photos of what they would encounter, everything they needed to take immediate action).
  • The Right Place to send them (GPS coordinates, nearest street intersections, and nearest access points for greenbelts).
  • The Right Format (easy to read and understand; clear; concise; digital for easy transmission to crews in field).
  • The Right Time (before the storm)

While we are at it, we should also give ourselves a pat on the back. Residents helped clear drains and ditches before the storm, too. That’s not only our right; it’s our duty. The City needs our help. Their crews can’t be everywhere at once; Houston covers a lot of territory.

Organizing to Reduce Flood Risk

How can we learn from our failures and replicate our successes? Last week, the Kings Forest Board of Directors voted to establish a permanent Flood Committee with two objectives:

  • Raise awareness among residents of issues that contribute to flooding
  • Identify and communicate problems we can’t resolve on our own to the Right People at the City and County.

In essence, the idea is to create a group like Neighborhood Watch or Crime Stoppers, but focused on flooding: Clog Stoppers! People who can spot problems and report them before they cause flooding.

Major examples of things that contribute to flooding:

  • Yard waste swept into sewers or dumped on greenbelts
  • Dead or dying trees about to fall into ditches
  • Not cutting deadfall into small pieces [large ones block culverts; max 2′ pieces recommended]
  • Irresponsible construction practices
  • Sand mining in floodways behind inadequate dikes
  • People altering drainage illegally

I hope the other community, trail, and commercial associations can form similar committees. Working together through KSA or some other grass roots organization, we can reduce flood risk for everyone. We can also help improve government efficiency by getting the right people, the right information, in the right place, at the right time, in the right format.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/20/2019

629 Days since Hurricane Harvey

City of Houston Intends to Waive Permit Fees for Homes Affected by Flooding May 7-9

Houston City Council Member Dave Martin announced Saturday that Mayor Sylvester Turner has agreed to waive permit fees for the hundreds of residents affected by flooding during the heavy rains during the week of May 7. Details still need to be worked out. More news to follow soon. This is a pleasant development for people whose homes and possessions were destroyed. Every little bit helps! Permit fees are certainly more than the price of peanuts.

Storm damage in Elm Grove where at least 196 homes flooded.

Posted by Bob Rehak on May 19, 2019

628 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Clear Debris from Drains Before Next Wave of Rain Hits

Multiple news outlets are reporting that 400 homes flooded in the Kingwood area yesterday due to street and ditch flooding. Street flooding happens when the RAINFALL RATE exceeds the DRAINAGE CAPACITY of storm sewers. Water backs up into streets where it waits until the input and output balance. But when drains are blocked by downed tree limbs, yard waste, and other debris water backs up even higher into homes as it did last night.

Flooded home in Elm Grove

Please Help Clear Drains of Debris

Matt Zeve, Deputy Executive Director of Harris County Flood Control, reminds everyone that, “All citizens have a responsibility to keep their storm sewer inlets and roadside ditches clear of yard debris, trash, and other items that can cause clogging. The City of Houston and Flood Control are not able to police every single ditch and storm sewer inlet out there. We are all in this together.”

It could be your house that you save from flooding in the next rain.

How to Report Debris in Ditches

Some debris will be beyond the capability of homeowners to clear, especially in creeks and drainage ditches. For instance, see the picture below.

Tree down in Ben’s Branch. Photo taken from Tree Lane just east of Bear Branch Elementary.

Clearing such blockages will take professionals with chain saws and lifting equipment.

Call Harris County Flood Control at 713-684-4197 to report these types of issues.  Please make sure you know the closest cross streets.

You can also contact flood control via the web.

City of Houston Also Requests Your Help in Clearing Drains

Dave Martin, Houston City Council Member said, “This morning, I asked the Mayor, and he agreed, like we did in December 2017 AFTER Harvey…in those flooded/affected areas, we will send cameras down the storm drains and sewers to see if there is any blockage. If there is, we will remediate.”

Martin continued, “We are also ‘re-engineering’ our ‘Adopt a Drain’ program which calls for our Residents to adopt a drain/storm sewer in their neighborhood, and periodically check the siltation/trash/clogging/buildup in THEIR drain.

More Rain on Way

At the start of the week, the National Weather Service forecasted 7-10 inches of rain for the week. Yesterday, when a storm stalled over Kingwood, we got that much in one afternoon. And more IS on the way.

NOAA Radar as of noon on Wednesday, 5/8/19.

Today’s Forecast from Flood Control

The next upper level disturbance is already moving into central Texas. The majority of the heavy rainfall should stay to our north today, but our area could certainly see rainfall this afternoon that could result in additional flooding, especially if it falls on areas that were hard hit on Tuesday.

Additionally there is a higher severe weather risk this afternoon especially north of I-10 where large hail, damaging winds, and isolated tornadoes will be possible.

Forecast Thursday-Saturday: 

Several complexes and clusters of storms can be expected through the period each capable of dropping multiple inches of rainfall. Expect a moderate risk of flash flooding both Thursday and Friday. 

Additional Rainfall Amounts 

Widespread rainfall of 5-8 inches with isolated totals of 9-12 inches will be possible today through Saturday. While these totals are spread over a 3 day period, much of what falls will likely fall in bursts with each cluster of storms. Air mass remains very much capable of intense rainfall rates as observed yesterday. Hourly rainfall rates of 2-4 inches per hour will remain possible which will quickly result in urban flash flooding and significant street flooding.

River Report

Grounds are saturated and any additional rainfall…especially in areas that saw heavy rains on Tuesday…is going to run directly into creek, bayous, and rivers that area already highly elevated. If the rainfall forecast does indeed verify, flooding of creeks and bayous in Harris County is certainly possible along with house flooding.

While several creeks and bayous are elevated, all are receding at this time including both the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto River.  

Flash Flood Outlook For Wednesday 

Flash Flood Outlook For Wednesday 

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/8/19 at noon

617 Days since Hurricane Harvey

One Less Thing to Worry About in Latest Storm: How Seasonal Lowering of Lake Conroe Helped

Storms during the last two days were traumatic for virtually everyone in the Kingwood area. Tragically, one person lost her life when her car hit a downed tree.

  • Others lost vehicles, trees, and sleep.
  • Torrential rains for a brief period – at the rate of 4-5 inches in an hour – flooded streets and vehicles.
  • They also brought water near or into homes.
  • Parents picking children up from school waited in rising waters as their students sheltered in place.
  • A small tornado may have briefly touched down near Town Center.
  • Kingwood Drive was shut down for hours during the Friday afternoon rush hour.
  • People traumatized by Harvey were re-traumatized.
  • People without power waited and wondered for hours about what was going on around them.

Lake Conroe: One Less Worry This Time

Despite all that, we did NOT have to worry about one thing: Lake Conroe opening its flood gates again during this storm. The seasonal lowering policy established last year worked.

The SJRA board voted to lower the lake’s level one foot to 200 mean feet above sea level (MSL) from April 1 to May 31.

That action may have saved the Lake Houston area from additional flooding in the last round of storms.

Releasing Water Continuously At Low Rate Created Extra Capacity

Lake Conroe had released water continuously since April 1 at a slow, controlled rate of 350 to 550 cubic feet per second. However, because of spring rains, Lake Conroe had only dropped about a half foot from 201 to 200.66 feet MSL. Had the releases not happened, the lake would have been an estimated 1-1.5 feet higher, according to Mark Micheletti, an SJRA board member from Kingwood. That means the lake level would have been approaching 202 feet, the level at which the SJRA automatically begins releasing water, when the storm hit. That would have forced the SJRA to release water at a higher rate that could have overloaded the downstream watershed.

Buffer Against Downstream Flooding Worked

In other words, the policy worked. The seasonal lowering provided a buffer against downstream flooding. NOAA shows a double crest on the San Jacinto West Fork at US59 during the last two days that coincided with two waves of storms. At peak flow, the river came within about two feet of going out of its banks.

An additional foot of water released from Lake Conroe would have added two feet to Lake Houston and created flooding.

About a mile downstream at River Grove Park, the water was up, but still within its banks.

Despite torrential rains last night and early this morning, the West Fork remained in its banks. The river was up, but no homes flooded from the river.

Success: No Rivers or Streams Out of Banks

At this hour, neither NOAA, the SJRA, nor Harris County Flood Control, predicts any flooding from yesterday’s storms. In fact, all streams and bayous seem to be receding at this time. That’s one less thing to worry about as we clean up from the latest storm. The SJRA’s seasonal lowering DID help.

Remember, Lake Conroe is almost twice as big as Lake Houston (33 sq. mi. vs 18.5 sq. mi.). So one foot released there translates into almost two feet here. And two feet would likely have forced the San Jacinto out of its banks for the fifth time in a year.

Kudos to the SJRA board, the City of Houston, and the TCEQ for enabling this policy. That, in conjunction with the City’s pre-release policy for Lake Houston, have made a difference.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/5/2019

614 Days since Hurricane Harvey

After Town Hall Meeting, Confusion Still Swirls Around Status of Mouth Bar

To hear the City tell it, we’re days away from agreement to dredge 1.5 million cubic yards of the mouth bar. To hear Congressman Dan Crenshaw tell it, the permit application hasn’t even been filed yet.

So where do things really stand. A reader asked last weekend, whether the Houston Chronicle story about the meeting was accurate.

The Chronicle headline said, “Crenshaw frustrated with delayed application for federal funds to remove notorious Kingwood mouth bar.”

Specifically, the reader asked, “Based on your knowledge, is this factual (City of Houston dragging its feet) or just politicians pointing the finger at each other?”

Before I step into the cross-fire, let me say this. Officials have conducted most meetings on this subject behind closed doors. But I shall attempt to answer the reader’s question based on public statements and documents supplied by Houston City Council member Dave Martin and the Army Corps.

Mouth Bar Chronology

To answer the “Is it foot-dragging or finger-pointing” question, I need to go back to the period after Harvey and put this subject in a historical context. Foot dragging depends on where you want to start the clock ticking. So bear with me.

2017: Post Harvey Discovery and Early Efforts to Raise Awareness

September, 14, 2017 – Two weeks after Harvey, I photographed the mouth bar from a helicopter. In the next few months, I began calling attention to it and other sediment problems every way I could. They included this web site, newspaper articles, and testimony before Texas Senate and House committees. At the House Natural Resources Committee hearing at the GRB, Dave Martin was present.

Mouth Bar of the West Fork of the San Jacinto. Like an iceberg, most of it is below water. To get past this blockage, water must flow uphill more than 30 feet.

Early 2018: Early Efforts to Forge Political Consensus

  • February of 2018 – Houston City Council Member Dave Martin began calling Governor Greg Abbott for help on an almost daily basis.
  • March 6, 2018 – Mayor Sylvester Turner announced at a Kingwood Town Hall meeting that he had on that same day spoken to Governor Greg Abbott about the urgent need to remove sediment from the San Jacinto River.
  • March, 15, 2018 – Governor Abbott visited Kingwood, took an aerial tour of the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto and met with local officials. After the meeting, he announced that, using Hazard Mitigation Funds, he was authorizing the Texas Department of Emergency Management (TDEM) to spend $3 million to jumpstart the engineering and permitting process to determine where dredging should take place on the San Jacinto River.
  • April. 6, 2018 – An Army Corps sonar-equipped boat began surveying a five-mile area between Hwy 69/59 and West Lake Houston Parkway.
  • April 10, 2018 – The Army Corps announced that it had completed the first leg of its survey of West Fork sedimentation.
  • May 9, 2018 – The Corps announced that it had completed the value engineering phase of its Emergency West Fork Dredging Program.
  • May 28, 2018 – DRC (under a contract with the City of Houston) began removing debris from Lake Houston to clear the way for dredging.

Mid-2018: Mouth Bar Excluded from Scope, Scramble to Identify Solutions

Second Half 2018: Effort to Save $18 million

  • July 19, 2018 – Mobilization for the project officially started. About this time, it became clear that mobilization represented 25% of the total cost of the $70,000,000 job, or about $18 million. If the dredging scope could be extended BEFORE the end of “Phase 1,” taxpayers could save the cost of a massive REmobilization for a second, separate project.
  • July 26, 2018 – Members of the Lake Houston Area Flood Prevention initiative meet with County Judge Ed Emmett to discuss priorities for the upcoming flood bond including additional dredging for the mouth bar.
  • July 27, 2018 – Tim Garfield and R.D. Kissling, two retired top geologists for a major oil company publish a paper describing why the mouth bar should be included in the scope of dredging.
  • August 9, 2018 – Houston City Council Member Dave Martin holds a meeting to line up the support of Senators Cruz and Cornyn for extending dredging to the mouth bar.
  • August 21, 2018 – Lake Houston Area Grass Roots Flood Prevention Group meets with Ted Poe to urge extension of dredging.
  • August 25, 2018 – Harris County voters approved a flood bond package that included money to extend dredging.

Late 2018: Countdown Clock Keeps Ticking

Storage Permit Controversy and Delays

Costello’s notes on the December 14th meeting also indicate that he had applied to the Corps for a permit to dispose of the dredged material. “A nationwide permit was submitted and subsequently denied by the USACE. We are meeting with all parties involved to discuss the next course of action required to obtain the necessary permits,” says the letter.

It would be another FOUR months before this meeting happened…by conference call.

A confidential source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, indicates a difference of opinion about the permit application. The source says the permit application, filed sometime in November of 2018, was NOT DENIED and that the Corps simply requested more information.

The City still has NOT supplied the additional information, nor has it reapplied for the permit.

Specifically, the Corps wanted to know how much material would be excavated, where it would be stored on the landowner’s property, whether there were any mitigation requirements, and whether there were alternative disposal sites in case the primary site proved unacceptable for some reason. There was also some confusion over the type of nationwide permit (NWP) requested. According to one source, the permit requested was for drying/dewatering the spoils and then hauling them off-site. However, the landowner wanted to keep the fill and use it to raise the level of his property.

“Tomorrow Afternoon”

On January 14, 2019, Costello told a group of Lake Houston Area leaders that he hoped to be taking core samples “tomorrow afternoon” and have results by the end of January. That did not happen.

It since has become clear that Costello met with TDEM Chief Nim Kidd on February 6th to discuss his data acquisition plan. He summarized it in a memo dated February 8th titled Lake Houston Dredging Analysis Workplan. The plan included three stages:

  1. Using a high frequency “Chirp-type” acoustic sub-bottom profiler data-acquisition tool
  2. Core sampling
  3. Sediment analysis

Note that on five other occasions between mid-January or mid-March, Costello told people that the City would be taking core samples “tomorrow afternoon.” Martin says they finally took the core samples the week before the March 21st town hall meeting.

No explanation was given for these delays. With $18 million dollars in remobilization fees at stake, no one ever even acknowledged the delays.

Core Sample Results

The results that Costello reported at the town hall meeting – $1.5 billion cubic yards – were preliminary estimates. At the meeting, Costello said he expected the final number “tomorrow afternoon” (there’s that phrase again) and that he would send the final report to FEMA no later than Monday, March 25. He vowed to refile an amended permit with the Corps by Friday, March 29. As of 5PM Monday, Costello still has not replied to inquires about whether he transmitted the results to FEMA.

Estimated depth of Harvey Deposits at core sample locations. Shown by Stephen Costello, City of Houston Chief Recovery Officer and Kingwood Town Hall Meeting on 3/21/2019. For a high resolution pdf of this image suitable for printing, click here.

Remember, there are two issues: FEMA controls funding; the Corps controls permitting for the storage.

Note that FEMA wants to limit funding to Harvey-related damage only; but the Corps is looking for a disposal site that could hold far more sediment, i.e., for pre-Harvey material. Other sources (City, County, State) could fund removal of pre-Harvey sediment to restore the full conveyance of the river. Having one site that could handle everything could save considerable permitting work.

Also lost in the Town Hall political pep rally was the fact that the Corps volunteered to prescreen the application to make sure it was complete and that the the city filed the right type of nationwide permit this time.

When the City says “We are moving as fast as humanly possible,” that sounds like a bit of exaggeration. It took the City four months to acquire the core samples needed to determine the Pre-Harvey volume of the mouth bar. Ultimately, they did it in an afternoon when facing the deadline of last week’s town hall meeting.

Next Steps vs. Deadline to Save $18 Million

So will the City be able to save the $18 million. The current dredging program is due to demobilize in a little more than a month, at the end of April. Before then:

  • FEMA must rule on findings of the core sampling before it can fund the mouth bar project (or at least the initial phase of it).
  • Several parties must audit any grant.
  • City must refile the correct type of permit with additional information.
  • Corps must review and comment.
  • Corps must hold a 30-day public comment period by Federal law.
  • Corps must issue final ruling on permit application.

That looks like at least several months worth of work.. So no, it doesn’t look like the City will be able to save taxpayers $18 million unless they can pull off a miracle.

Is the City moving “as fast as humanly possible?” as one city official said at the Town Hall meeting last week.

You be the judge. How long this has taken depends on where you want to start the clock ticking. It’s not as clear as either side would have you believe. Still there are huge gaps in the timetable that need to be explained to the public…especially if we lose $18 million.

Late-Breaking News: Huberty Amendment to CSSB 500 on Mouth Bar

Meanwhile, State Representative Dan Huberty filed this amendment to CSSB 500 on March 22. It would provide $30 million for dredging the mouth bar. (CSSB stands for Committee Substitute Senate Bill. SB 500 is an omnibus spending bill approved by the Senate, now being considered in the Texas House as CSSB 500.) That money, if approved, could go a long way toward dredging the portion of the mouth bar that FEMA doesn’t fund and the rest of the West Fork.

Posted by Bob Rehak on March 25, 2019

573 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Mayor Turner Appoints Aho as new Chief Resilience Officer for City of Houston

The Houston Chronicle reported at noon today that Mayor Sylvester Turner appointed a new Chief Resilience Officer, a job formerly held by Stephen Costello. The story makes only a brief reference to Costello in the last paragraph. It says, “Stephen Costello, Houston’s former chief resilience officer, began overseeing the city’s Harvey recovery efforts in November 2018. He took over as “recovery czar” from Marvin Odum, the former president of Shell.”

Definition of Resilience Broadened to Include Economic Equity

The press release issued by City Hall mentions nothing of Costello and mentions flooding only once. It appears to broaden the scope of resilience and places major emphasis on “social and economic equity” in resilience planning.

Marissa Aho, City of Houston’s new Chief Resilience Officer. Photo Courtesy of Mayor’s office.

It says, “Mayor Sylvester Turner has appointed Marissa Aho, AICP, as chief resilience officer for the City of Houston… The position will play an essential role in leading city-wide resilience-building efforts to help Houston prepare for, withstand, and bounce back from the ‘’shocks’’ – catastrophic events like hurricanes, floods, and cyberattacks – and “stresses” – slow-moving disasters like aging infrastructure, homelessness, and economic inequality, which are increasingly part of 21st century life.”

As chief resilience officer, Aho will report directly to Mayor Turner. She will oversee the development and implementation of a comprehensive Resilience Strategy for the city. Aho comes to Houston from the City of Los Angeles. There she served as Chief Resilience Officer (CRO) for the past four years. 

“The CRO,” says the press release, “…will address the resilience vulnerabilities of all city residents, with a particular focus on low-income and vulnerable populations.”

Bringing LA Experience to Houston

“While serving as CRO in Los Angeles, Aho paved the way for Los Angeles to embed resilience as a value that guides municipal planning, culminating in the appointment of more than 30 departmental chief resilience officers (DCROs) who form an in-city network in each branch of city government. 

“Other innovative initiatives in Resilient Los Angeles,” says the press release, “include developing an urban heat vulnerability index and mitigation plan, placing an equity lens over the city’s response to increasing extreme heat.” 

According to the City, Houston remains vulnerable to less-familiar shocks and stresses, such as environmental degradation and access to economic opportunity.

It’s not clear from either the news release or the Chronicle story what role Costello will play vis-a-vis Aho, if any.

About New Houston CRO Marissa Aho, AICP 

Prior to serving as the Los Angeles CRO, she held senior staff positions at two Los Angeles planning and land use consulting firms. Aho has 15 years of policy, planning, and project management experience in the public, private, and nonprofit sectors where she has worked with interdisciplinary teams to find creative solutions to complex problems. She has a BA in political science from American University and a master of planning from the University of Southern California Price School of Public Policy. She is the Region VI commissioner for the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP), section director of the Los Angeles Section of the American Planning Association (APA LA), and is a member of the USC Price Alumni Association board of directors. 

Posted by Bob Rehak on February 26, 2019

546 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Log Jam Finally Broken on Long-Awaited Regional San Jacinto River Basin Study

In March last year, the San Jacinto River Authority, City of Houston, Montgomery County and Harris County proposed a river basin study of the San Jacinto.

Scope of River Basin Study

The scope includes evaluating the cost effectiveness and feasibility of a variety of flood mitigation projects. They include additional gates for the Lake Houston Dam, additional dredging and additional upstream detention – all important for the Lake Houston Area.

West Fork Sand Mine Complex inundated by Harvey.

But the scope also includes many other potential projects. The $2+ million grant request to FEMA covered the entire San Jacinto River basin including the East and West Forks.

10 Months of Delays

Then the grant request fell into a great black hole. Nine months went by while FEMA pondered and tweaked the 15-page grant application. Finally, FEMA was ready to write the check in December…when the government shut down.

Finally, a Green Light

Today, however, I got news that FEMA finally green-lighted the project through TDEM, the Texas Division of Emergency Management. TDEM coordinates all FEMA requests for the State of Texas.

This will benefit multiple counties throughout entire basin. It’s not often this many governmental entities come together to impact an area this large.

Residents trying to escape as Harvey's floodwaters rose
Residents of Kingwood Village Estates trying to escape as Harvey’s floodwaters rose. 12 residents died as a result of injuries sustained during evacuation or the stress from losing their homes.

All parties have reportedly signed inter-local agreements (ILAs) already. An ILA is like a contract between governmental entities.

Next Steps Before Kickoff

Next steps: Harris County Flood Control will present details of the grant package to Harris County Commissioners Court at the Court’s Feb 12th meeting.

Following court acceptance of the grant, HCFCD hopes to obtain Commissioner’s Court approval of the agreement with the consulting firms that will execute the river basin study. 

All those involved hope for an official study kickoff in late February/early March.

Among many other things, study will examine sedimentation and its role in flooding.

For More Information

Harris County Flood Control is currently working to update its website. When additional information becomes available later this week, you will be able to view it at: https://www.hcfcd.org/hurricane-harvey/hurricane-harvey-kingwood-information/upper-san-jacinto-river-regional-watershed-flood-mitigation-plan/

Study to Take 18 Months

Originally, the study was to have taken approximately a year. However, additional FEMA requirements mean it will now take 18 months. That means we should be looking at recommendations 3 years after Harvey. Then the partners will submit additional grants to FEMA for projects that result from the study.

See my previous editorial comments about the state of disaster mitigation. “Time is the enemy of disaster mitigation”. You can quote me on that.

Posted by Bob Rehak on January 29, 2019

518 Days after Hurricane Harvey

Why the City Needs Regular River Surveys and Maintenance Dredging

Three months after supposedly reaching an agreement in principle to remove the mouth bar, FEMA, the Army Corps, the State and City still have no agreement in writing. From Day 1 of negotiations, FEMA and the Corps have consistently said they can’t address pre-Harvey conditions. I’m beginning to believe them. How did we reach this impasse and how can we move forward?

FEMA’s Dilemma

The Stafford Act (FEMA’s enabling legislation) prohibits FEMA from funding repairs not directly related to Harvey. But, because the City conducted no surveys after the Memorial or Tax Day Floods, it cannot prove how much came from Harvey. Yet it has asked FEMA and the Corps to remove the entire mouth bar.

The City’s Dilemma

The City of Houston has done little to maintain Lake Houston, especially the West Fork of the San Jacinto near Kingwood. Lack of regular surveys and maintenance dredging make city officials look like they’re trying to get others to clean up their mess.

Historical Perspective

Decades ago, after the 1994 flood, the City hired Brown & Root to study sedimentation in the lake, which includes about 13 miles of the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto. Engineers recommended surveying the river after every major storm and dredging when necessary to reduce the risk of flooding. They even pinpointed where sediment would likely build up and pointed out that the West Fork was capturing 42% of all the sediment coming into the lake (see page 9). However, before Harvey, the City never dredged and rarely conducted surveys – decisions that haunt us today.

The mouth bar. Sand, in part from the mines, has almost totally blocked the West Fork where it meets Lake Houston. Unofficial before/after measurements show that as much as ten feet was deposited in this area during Harvey (five below water/five above).

Sedimentation: Danger that Can No Longer Be Ignored

One insidious aspect of sedimentation is its invisibility. Like gunk in pipes, you can’t see it – until water backs up and floods your home. That’s exactly what happened to thousands of homes during Harvey. The problem which had slowly built up for years, went from sub-acute to critical almost overnight because of the massive volume of sediment deposited during Harvey.

That brings us to our present impasse.

No News is Bad News

The City, FEMA, the Army Corps and the State have argued about this for at least six months. We thought they reached agreement in principle to remove the mouth bar three months ago. But still no official announcements have been made. Sadly, it didn’t have to come to this:

  • If only the City had followed the advice of the experts it hired…
  • If only the City had maintained its property…
  • If only the City could document how much Harvey contributed to the blockage…
  • If only the City had acted years ago to limit sand mining in the floodway of the river…
  • …we could have been working on the mouth bar already. Instead…

Problem Becoming Demonstrably Worse

In the 80 years since we started keeping records on the West Fork at US59, the river has crested over 50 feet 40 times – once every other year. But in the last 11 months, floods have reached that height SIX times – more than once every other month. We topped 50 feet in the latest flood just minutes ago. All resulted from relatively minor rains. This sudden surge in frequency did not result from global warming.

Is it all a statistical fluke? Wetter than usual weather? El Niño? Upstream development? Perhaps some of each. But one would have to be blind to dismiss the sediment buildup in the river. A delta is marching steadily downstream, creating blockages that back water up.

The West Fork just before Kingwood’s annexation in 1996 and after Harvey. Comparison shows advancing sediment buildups blocking the river.

The High Cost of Ignoring Expert Advice and Routine Maintenance

Harvey brought the high cost of ignoring expert advice and routine maintenance into sharp focus. The lack of a survey that could have been conducted in a few days is costing the City months of delays and potentially tens of millions of dollars in State and Federal assistance. This exposes hundreds of thousands of residents to needless flood risk and undermines property values.

What Needs to Happen

All of this underscores the need to budget for and maintain one’s own property. Drainage fees, which we just put a lock box around, should easily handle the City’s portion of dredging projects and surveys.

How do we break this impasse?

FEMA and the Corps need to restore the conveyance of the river that existed before Harvey. Estimate it using available evidence like aerial photos and satellite images. We’ll never have an exact figure. So quit using that as an excuse to put hundreds of thousands of people at risk. Let’s get started with dredging what we can. Legally.

In return, the City could commit to annual river surveys that document the status of the river before each hurricane season.

The City also could commit to a regular maintenance dredging program to keep sediment at a sub-acute level. The annual surveys will determine the exact amounts and frequencies.

The City could also throw its weight behind legislative efforts to move sand mines out of the floodway, where they contribute to levels of sedimentation far beyond natural rates.

I’m not a mediator and I’m not the Mayor, but that sounds like a fair compromise that can protect residents as well as officials on both sides of this negotiation.

Floods don’t happen as often as police or fire emergencies, but when they do, they affect hundreds of thousands of people in ways that can be just as life altering. This is a public safety issue. Let’s go. Reach an agreement, please!

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

Posted by Bob Rehak on January 4, 2019

493 Days since Hurricane Harvey


Whew! Luck and Aggressive Action Avert Major Flooding

Good to have the Pearl Harbor Day flooding in the rear-view mirror. And good that the worst predictions did not come true. So what happened? Did we just get lucky? Or did something go right for a change? It might have been a little of both.

Here’s what I know at 8 p.m. on Saturday night, about when the flood was expected to crest and flood multiple neighborhoods.

Lake Conroe Releases Have Peaked

According to Jace Houston, General Manager of the SJRA, releases from the Lake Conroe dam have likely peaked. The current release rate of 8181 cfs falls far short of previous floods and short of 9,000 to 11,000 cfs release rates predicted earlier.

Less Rain than Expected

That’s because we got less rainfall than predicted. Most of the area, including Lake Houston and upstream from Lake Conroe, received about 4.5 inches or less instead of the 8 to 10 predicted earlier.  And rain was fairly spread out over time. The heaviest rainfall seems to have happened in The Woodlands with some gages approaching 6 inches.

Aggressive Pre-Release by City

Finally, the City of Houston started releasing water from the Lake Houston Dam two days in advance of the storm. They took the lake level down two feet before the storm and kept releasing water during the storm. Had it not been for that, homes along the shoreline would almost certainly have flooded.

Looking across the flood-swollen San Jacinto at the US Army Corps of Engineers’ Command Site. Had the City not pre-released more than 2 feet of water from Lake Houston, this site would have been inundated.

Trending Steady or Down

At this moment, every stream gage that the SJRA reports upstream from the Lake Houston area is trending down. The peak has passed.

Harris County Flood Control shows that the gages at US59, West Lake Houston Parkway and FM1960 also appear to have peaked.

A photographic tour of the Kingwood area this afternoon showed that the river came out of its banks at River Grove Park and US59 and was on the verge of coming out in many other places. Surprisingly, I saw no flooded homes, not even on Marina Drive in Forest Cove. However, I did hear of many affected by street flooding, especially upstream in Montgomery County.

Still Much Mitigation Work to Do

Ben’s Branch by the Enclave and Kingwood Library had standing water. That should be a reminder that the County needs to make cleaning out this stream a high priority. 

One final point. Late this afternoon, I noticed a huge difference between the gages upstream and downstream from the dredging.

At 59, the West Fork exceeded its banks and peaked at 52 feet.
At West Lake Houston Parkway, the river was well within its banks and peaking around 45 feet.
At FM1960 the river was still well within banks and peaking at 44 feet.

Normally, these gages all read the same elevation. One can partially attribute the differences to spreading of the river. However one must also consider the huge blockages in the river that the Corps has not yet removed. At the moment, one of the biggest is just downstream from River Grove Park. Another, the mouth bar, blocks the river between Kings Point and Atascocita Point.

Even during a flood, the mouth bar (in the middle of this picture) stands out of the water by several feet and blocks the mouth of the West Fork. Water must make its way past this blockage through narrow passages on either side of it. It backs water up throughout the Humble/Kingwood area.
Here’s what the mouth bar looks like from the air, right after Harvey, before grass started growing on it. The area around it averages 1-3 feet deep. The deepest parts of the narrow channel reach 5 feet deep.

The Lake Houston Area lucked out this time due to aggressive action by City officials, a conservative release rate by the SJRA and the kindness of Mother Nature. I hope we don’t press our luck and assume that these blockages make no difference. They do. We need to remove them.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/8/2018

466 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Background on Houston Proposition A: Drainage Fee Re-vote

Warning: I’m not making a recommendation in this post. I am just trying to provide background information that may help you understand this issue and why its on the ballot again.

History of the “Drainage Fee”

Historically, Houston issued bonds to finance capital projects related to drainage and street improvements. About a decade ago, a group of engineers worried that we spent too much on interest, perpetually underfunded drainage, and constantly diverted money to less important things. So in 2010, they managed to get a referendum on the ballot that would create a dedicated fund out of current revenue for such improvements.

Ads featured a man who had flooded repeatedly. He blamed politicians who diverted money away from needed drainage projects. He said we needed to create a “lockbox” around future funds to ensure they were spent for their intended purpose.

Photo by Kilee Northrup. Forest Cove Drive in Forest Cove. From Wednesday, August 30th, late afternoon, "once I was able to drive out of my villiage (Mills Branch)."

Photo by Kilee Northrup. Forest Cove Drive on August 30th during Harvey.

Voters narrowly approved the Amendment (51-49). Subsequently, the City Council voted to add it to the City Charter (Article IX, Section 22: Dedicated Pay-As-You-Go Fund for Drainage and Streets.)

Court Challenge

The new amendment ran into problems immediately, not because of the supposed lockbox, but because of the way the City worded the summary of the amendment on the BALLOT itself.

The summary simply said, “Shall the City Charter of the City of Houston be amended to provide for the enhancement, improvement and ongoing renewal of Houston’s drainage and streets by creating a Dedicated Pay-As-You-Go Fund for drainage and streets?”

In 2015, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the summary (not the amendment) was misleading. It failed to disclose that the money would be raised through a new tax/fee on residents. The Texas Supreme Court then remanded the issue back to a trial court. which voided the election and ordered a new one.

Re-vote Confusing

Now, in 2018, we’re getting a chance to vote again on the 2010 measure. However:

  • The City claims that a positive vote will affirm the drainage fee, but a negative vote will not invalidate it.
  • The wording for the funding formula has changed and no one has yet explained why.
  • The vote is being positioned as a chance to create the lockbox promised eight years ago, but the referendum’s wording is virtually identical to the 2010 wording.
  • Even though this is popularly known as the drainage fee, the language that created it allows money to be used for a wide range of things not related to drainage (streets, salaries, vehicles, etc.)
  • The wording does not define the terms used within the amendment, nor does it specify the percentage of the money that should go toward drainage.

Let’s look at each one of these issues.

Texas Supreme Court and the Do-Over Vote

When you read a summary of any proposed amendment at the ballot box, it’s supposed to be a fair and accurate reflection of the proposal. The Supreme Court ruled that the 2010 ballot language in this case could mislead voters. That’s because it did’t disclose that voters would pay for the dedicated fund with a new tax on themselves.

Justice John Devine said in the conclusion of the ruling (see page 15) that, “The City did not adequately describe the chief features—the character and purpose—of the charter amendment on the ballot. By omitting the drainage charges, it failed to substantially submit the measure with such definiteness and certainty that voters would not be misled.”

The court found no problem with any other wording in the amendment. The new 2018 ballot language DOES disclose the tax on residents this time. Here’s how it reads.

Ballot Language for 2018 Proposition 

[Relating to the Creation of a Dedicated Funding Source to Enhance, Improve and Renew Drainage Systems and Streets]

“Shall the Houston City Charter be amended to establish a Dedicated Pay-As-You-Go Fund, to be used for the enhancement, improvement, and ongoing renewal of Houston’s drainage and streets, funded annually from the following sources: (i) developer impact fees; (ii) drainage charges, to property owners or users, to recover costs of providing drainage to benefitting real properties; (iii) a portion of the City’s ad valorem tax levy; and (iv) third-party contracts, grants, or payments earmarked or dedicated to drainage or streets?”

Vote Could Affirm, But Not Invalidate

After voters narrowly approved the 2010 amendment, a City Council vote actually added it to the City Charter. The City now argues that the Supreme Court ruling does not invalidate the City Council vote, only the results of the referendum. The tax will not go away regardless of how you vote, according to Mayor Sylvester Turner. So why are we having a re-vote if there is no real consequence?

Said Mayor Sylvester Turner in the Houston Chronicle, “We are simply saying in November to the voters: Go and reaffirm the dedicated purpose for which this fee is intended, put a lockbox around it. Voters are not being asked to increase the fee or create another fee, just to reaffirm what already is.”

Does the 2018 Language Create a Lockbox?

According to the Houston Chronicle, Mayor Turner believes that the Supreme Court decision removed a lockbox around the source of funding and that “approving the charter amendment this year would restore it.”

Even though he feels the City does not need voter validation to retain the fee, for some reason, he feels the need for validation to keep the fee dedicated to drainage and streets. Perhaps he feels financial pressures.

Critics claim that revenues have been diverted for unintended purposes in the past. The City is trying to re-sell the concept by saying that a YES vote will create a lockbox around the money and a NO vote will allow money to be used in the general fund. There’s truth to this, and also some scare tactics, especially at a time when the firefighters are asking for large raises. However…

Critics say that there never was an effective lockbox. Moreover, there is NO new language in the 2018 amendment that creates or strengthens one. In fact, the 2018 language  is virtually identical to the 2010 language.

When I asked the Mayor’s office to point out the language in the 2018 referendum that created a lockbox around the money, I received a response from an aid who simply asserted it did so without explaining how.

Equal Vs. Equivalent

One key word has changed out of 518 words in the amendment. Amidst all the talk about lockboxes and affirmation, it has been overlooked.

The formula for allocating money to the fund mysteriously changed.

In section B (iii) the word “equal” became “equivalent.” There has been no public discussion of the impact of this change.

It’s not clear whether any change in the language of the amendment is even legal. The Trial Court’s Final Summary Judgment ordered a new election for Proposition 1 (what it was called in 2010), not a new election on a variation of it.

Here’s the change – in context of the funding mechanism in the bill:

City Charter Section B (iii) as adopted in 2010 (see Article IX, Section 22) reads:

“An amount equivalent to proceeds from $0.118 of the City’s ad valorem tax levy minus an amount equal to debt service for drainage and streets for any outstanding bonds or notes…”

B (iii) in the current 2018 ballot reads:

“An amount equivalent to proceeds from $0.118 of the City’s ad valorem tax levy minus an amount equivalent to debt service for drainage and streets for any outstanding bonds or notes…”

You might ask, “Don’t they mean the same thing?”  Not necessarily.

Equal means exactly the same in number; equivalent means the same value or weight. For instance, one 2010 dollar equals one 2018 dollar. However, adjusted for inflation, that same dollar would now be equivalent to $1.16. Another example: At this moment, $1 U.S. dollar is equivalent to $1.31 Canadian dollars.

Changing equal to equivalent makes me wonder whether something else is changing that could affect the debt-service calculation and therefore the amount that comes out of the city’s ad valorem tax. A change in the property tax rate? Interest rates? Home values affected by Harvey?

Usually when finance people talk about “equivalents,” they adjust for something: inflation, deflation, currency fluctuation, discounts, exchange rates, time value, etc. It’s not clear why they made this change….especially if the election is only to “affirm what is.”

The change might or might not be something crucial. But changing one word out of 518 makes me believe that someone did it intentionally, not accidentally, especially in this age of cut-and-paste.

Lack of Clarity

Vagueness and self-contradictions have plagued this amendment from the start.

  • Fees were originally intended for capital projects, but the amendment allows 25% of the money to go toward  maintenance and operations.
  • The public knows Proposition A as a drainage fee, but the fee also pays for street improvements. What constitutes a street improvement? New pavement and bigger storm drains? Surveys? Engineering fees? An asphalt patch? A bicycle lane? A bus lane? Stop signs? Traffic lights? Salaries of Public Works employees? The vehicles they drive? Turns out, it’s all of the above. Pretty much anything that touches a street.
  • Proponents keep talking about a lockbox. But the amendment contains no provisions for financial transparency, segregation of funds, council approvals, audits, or public reporting that would create a true lockbox.

Early Voting Starts Monday

If you believe money was diverted from this fund to pay for services other than drainage, then Proposition A won’t give you much comfort. The language is virtually identical to the last one.

How you vote will depend on:

  • How happy you are with the existing drainage fee
  • How much you trust people to do the right thing
  • Whether you’re a “something-is-better-than-nothing” person or a “let’s-start-over-and-get-this-right” type.
  • Whether you’re satisfied with the speed of mitigation efforts.

Now that you have the backstory, review the original language you’re voting on. Will it do what you want? If so, vote yes. If not, vote no.

Posted by Bob Rehak on October 20, 2018

417 Days since Hurricane Harvey