1/28/25 – To date, members of the 89th Texas Legislature have introduced more than three dozens bills relating to flooding, dredging, and aggregate production operations (APOs) in Austin this year. The deadline for filing additional bills is Friday, March 14, 2025, 60 days from the start of the session. So, more could follow.
But here is a brief rundown on bills flood- and mitigation-related bills with links to the text of the actual bills on the Texas Legislature Online website.
Flooding
Thirty-six bills contain the keywords “flood” or “flooding.” So, I won’t summarize each. Instead, I’ll focus on those that could make the largest impact in the Houston region.
HB 2068 by Rep. Dennis Paul would amend the bill that created the Harris County Flood Control District. It would allow the district to grow beyond the boundaries of Harris County, when and if surrounding counties wish to join the District and coordinate efforts. The expanded District’s board would have five directors appointed by the governor.
HB 1209 by Rep. Charles Cunningham addresses the minimum number of instructional days required by the state’s schools affected by “flood days” or other extreme weather conditions. See also similar bills, such as HB 236, HB 683, HB 1157, HB 1703, HB 276, HB 1889, SB 233, and HB 1257.
State Representative Charles Cunningham from District 127.
HB 866 by Ron Reynolds would create a Climate Change Impact Assessment Council. The Council would assess current and potential effects of climate change and their costs. It would also research ways to mitigate climate change and recommend legislation to minimize its adverse impacts.
HB 941 by Rep. Briscoe Cain and SB 75 by Sen. Bob Hall et. al. relate to the resilience of the electric grid during extreme weather events and other hazards. It would establish a security commission to establish resilience standards, plans and provisions.
HB 798 by Rep. Armando Walle relates to the rights and duties of both residential tenants and landlords involved in disputes that may arise over flooding, broken pipes, sewage backups and other habitability issues. It defines how long the parties have to cure defects or non-payments in the disputes, and what their rights are.
Dredging
Legislators have introduced three bills containing the keywords “dredge” or “dredging.”
HB 1532 by Rep. Charles Cunningham relates to the creation of a Lake Houston Dredging and Maintenance District. It would give the District the authority to issue bonds and sell the material it dredges, but would not give it taxing authority.
HB 1069 by Rep. Chris Turner relates to the classification of construction workers in dredging and other trades, and their eligibility for unemployment benefits.
SB 766 by Senator Judith Zaffirini corrects references, including those related to dredge material and dredging plans, in TCEQ documents and regulations.
Aggregate Production Operations
Four bills refer to “aggregate production operations” (APOs). APOs include sand mines, which have contributed to flooding by increasing sedimentation in the headwaters of Lake Houston.
HB 873 by Rep. Terry M. Wilson relates to permits for APOs. Among other things, it would require APOs to control erosion by revegetating barren land. It would also require them to provide performance bonds to the TCEQ that would cover the cost of violations.
HB1163 by Rep. Charles Cunningham would amend Subchapter E (Planning and Financial Responsibility) of the state water code. It targets APOs operating within 1500 feet of the San Jacinto River or its tributaries. And it would obligate APOs to develop a restoration plan. Among other items, the bill requires APOs to return water quality of the “receiving body” (i.e., the river) to its original condition in the event of an unauthorized discharge. The main focus is on restoration of the mine itself and guarantees that would cover the costs of restoration.
HB 1018 by Rep. Terry M. Wilson establishes a certification program for APO operators, identifying those that do and don’t comply with best management practices.
SB 729 by Sen. Nathan Johnson relates to the operation of rock crushing facilities and monitoring of the air contaminants they generate.
Flood Infrastructure Fund
I couldn’t find anything yet about the state’s Flood Infrastructure Fund. Will the legislature ad to the funding? The State compiled its first flood plan last year. It contained more than $50 billion in project recommendations. What will be their fate? Stay tuned. I’ll try to review the progress of these and related bills as the session progresses.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/28/25
2709 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/20240919-DSC_0586.jpg?fit=1100%2C733&ssl=17331100adminadmin2025-01-28 16:52:192025-01-28 16:58:4589th Texas Legislature Bills Related to Flooding, Dredging, APOs
Three meetings will make this a crucial week for subsidence and flooding for large parts of Montgomery and Harris Counties. For months now, the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District (LSGCD) has adamantly opposed any mention of subsidence in its Desired Future Conditions (DFCs) while it argues for increased groundwater pumping. But LSGCD must get the other members of Groundwater Management Area 14 (GMA-14) to approve its DFCs before they can allow increased pumping. And opinions regarding those DFCS are far from unanimous. GMA-14 members are pushing for a metric that limits subsidence; LSGCD is fighting that.
TownshipFuture Meeting Tuesday
With that in mind, a group called TownshipFuture will host a Zoom webinar featuring experts from the San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA), the Houston-Galveston Subsidence District (HGSD), and The Woodlands Water Authority (WWA). Says Robert Leilich, president of Woodlands MUD #1 and a steering committee member of TownshipFuture, “The meeting will explore how the cost of water is related to the potential for more flooding and what you can do about it. Upcoming proposals from the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District could lead to increased subsidence, causing residents to pay more for water. These proposals could also increase the risk of physical damage to homes and the risk of flooding in flood-prone areas of The Woodlands.”
The TownshipFuture Meetingis Tuesday, April 6, at 7PM. The Zoom webinar is free and all are invited. To register, go to https://forms.gle/GYcG1Q1uekCGbrCz6. You will be sent an email with instructions how to sign into the webinar.
GMA 14 has the authority to approve or disapprove any increase in LGGCD’s groundwater pumping. To support the petition, add your name at the bottom.
LSGCD Meeting Wednesday
Then, on Wednesday, April 7, at 4PM, the LSGCD will hold a special board meeting. According to the agenda, the board will go into executive session immediately after public comments to consider litigation. (However, they don’t disclose the nature of the litigation.) They will then take up two matters:
Proposed Desired Future Conditions for GMA 14.
Hiring a PR firm.
LSGCD staff recently finished a series of stakeholder input sessions. But the agenda does not list a report to the board on staff findings.
The hiring of a PR firm is a highly unusual move for a group of this nature. According to some observers, it indicates that LSGCD failed to convince scientists of their position on subsidence and is now taking its case to the public. One insider, though, claimed the board just feels “misunderstood.” They feel they are the victims of “misinformation.”
However, GMA-14 has a May 1 deadline to formulate proposed DFCs for 14 counties. So if LSGCD and the other members can’t reach a suitable compromise this week, they will need to schedule another meeting before the end of the month. And they are already pushing up against a public notice requirement for a second meeting.
Between May and January deadlines, GMA-14 must solicit public comments for 90 days on the proposed DFCs; review and publish the comments; adopt or modify the DFCs; and submit them to the TWDB. Final adoption of the DFCs requires a two-thirds vote of all the members of the groundwater management area.
At the last GMA-14 meeting, LSGCD requested more time to meet with stakeholders and its board before finalizing a DFC statement. The big questions are, “Will LSGCD request more time to finalize a proposed DFC statement for Montgomery County?” And if so, “Will it include a mention of subsidence?”
USGS is a non-political, scientific agency. It states in its research that the “land subsidence in the Houston-Galveston Region … partially or completely submerges land”, “disrupts collector drains and irrigation ditches”, and “alters the flow of creeks and bayous which may increase the frequency and severity of flooding.” To read the full research on Texas Gulf Coast Groundwater and Land Subsidence, please visit: https://txpub.usgs.gov/houston_subsidence/home/
Other scientists have also documented links between subsidence, flooding, and other damages. Check out these studies.
Subsidence exposes inland areas to increased risks of flooding and erosion by altering natural and engineered drainage-ways (open channels and pipelines) that depend on gravity-driven flow of storm-runoff and sewerage.
Expected subsidence in Harris County if GMA-14 lets Montgomery County pump 30% of its aquifers (70% remaining). The assumption going in was that this could cause up to 1 foot of subsidence, but modeling shows it creates far more.
Differential subsidence, depending on where it occurs with respect to the location of drainageways, may reduce or enhance preexisting gradients. Gradient reductions decrease the rate of drainage and thereby increase the chance of flooding by storm-water runoff. See https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/circ1182/pdf/07Houston.pdf.
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Slide3.jpeg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=16751200adminadmin2021-04-05 17:40:102021-04-06 09:45:21Crucial Week for Future of Subsidence, Flooding
One of multiple breaches at the Triple PG mine in Porter left open for months until the Attorney General sued the mine.
Purpose: To Balance Priorities While Addressing Concerns
Texas House Speaker Dennis Bonnen created the committee to help balance public protection, regulation and economic growth. Bonnen tasked the Committee with reviewing complaints about APOs and making recommendations to the 87th Texas Legislature. Issues include:
Nuisance issues relating to noise and light
Transportation safety and road repairs
Air quality
Blasting
Reclamation
Distance from adjoining properties
Disruption of groundwater
Water quality
Sedimentation and flooding
Municipal ordinances.
The report begins with a description of the balancing act regulators face. Sand and gravel used in concrete support economic growth. But they also impact surrounding property values, impact the health of neighbors, and lower quality of life when they cut corners and operate outside of industry best practices to lower production costs.
A number of bills in the last legislative session sought to resolve these conflicts and many, such as “best practices” will be reintroduced during the session which started this month. Pages 7-10 describe the legislation attempted in the last session.
Below, I summarize each issue listed above in order.
Noise Pollution
The main sources of noise from APOs come from the machinery used to move earth, process raw material and move product. Blasting is also a major consideration in the Hill Country.
The U.S. Mining Health and Safety Administration (MSHA) characterizes noise and one of the most pervasive health hazards in mining. Prolonged exposure to hazardous sound levels over a period of years can cause permanent, irreversible damage to hearing. Hearing loss may occur rapidly under prolonged exposure to high sound levels, or gradually when levels are lower and exposures less frequent.
Ways to reduce noise from moving equipment include use of strobes, alarms, camera systems and motion sensors that can trigger backup beepers as needed.
To mitigate noise from processing equipment, the report suggests chute liners and screens made of rubber or urethane to dampen the sound of the rock hitting the sides of the conveyors. Acoustical enclosures such as walls, berms and natural vegetation can also help protect neighbors.
APOs should monitor the noise exposure at their property line, keeping the noise level at their property line below 65 dB if the property line is within 880 yards of a residential area, school, or house of worship, and 70 dB if not.
Report Recommendation
Light Pollution
APOs create light pollution when the dust they generate scatters light and creates haze. Those that operate at night may require light for safety that keeps neighbors up.
APOs should be held to IDA and IES standards for outdoor industrial lighting, and fined when they don’t.
Report Recommendation
These standards provide operator safety yet shield neighbors from the most annoying effects of light pollution.
Transportation
The high volume of heavy trucks used to move product creates traffic safety issues near APOs and damages roads. TxDOT allows APOs to build 90-degree driveways. These are less expensive, but more dangerous than acceleration and deceleration lanes which provide massive safety benefits.
Dust and small rocks coming off of trucks cause windshield damage and obscure vision of nearby drivers. Placement of roadway bumps leading up to acceleration lanes would help shake off the dust and smaller rocks from the trucks before they make their way onto the highway.
Studies have also shown that the level of damage to the integrity of roads by heavy commercial vehicles far outpaces the funding they contribute through gas taxes. Such vehicles pay $.03 per mile, but cost $.26 per mile.
Recommendations:
Change TxDOT protocols to allow for an agreed upon change to a driveway should traffic conditions change.
Require that new APOs have enough right of way purchased to construct acceleration or decelerations lanes.
Commission a study to establish a Pricing Model for Pavement
Air Quality
Suffice it to say that the health risks of breathing APO dust are voluminous.
Short-term exposure can result in coughing, shortness of breath, tightness in the chest and irritation of the eyes.
Long-term exposure can result in reduced lung function, and respiratory diseases such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, emphysema, impairment of brain development, low birth weight, lung cancer, stroke, aggravation of existing lung disease, and death.
OSHA, MSHA and other agencies responsible for worker health continue to reduce allowable exposure levels for labor; these same reduced exposure levels should be applied to the general population as well, says the report.
Testimony from those living near APOs who have been affected by the decline in air quality demonstrates that regular regional air-quality monitoring is insufficient. So, TCEQ does not know what the actual, real-time particulate concentrations are in the air near APOs.
Recommendations:
Require APOs to set up onsite monitoring.
Commission a study to determine cumulative effects of adjacent mines, each outputting a compliant level.
Modify the TCEQ permitting process to include county commissioners, municipal authorities and others.
Blasting
This is a bigger problem in the Hill County than Houston. So I will skip it here.
Reclamation
APO’s can suddenly cease operation for a number of reasons: bankruptcy, depleted assets, decline in demand, etc. While sites can never be returned to their original condition, they CAN be restored for safe, alternative uses.
At a minimum, this means removing hazardous materials and industrial equipment, and sloping walls to avoid leaving dangerous collapses.
Recommendations:
Require APO to file a reclamation/restoration plan.
Require operators to post a Surety Bond to cover all reclamation costs in the event the operator fails to reclaim disturbed lands.
Address all potential future safety and environmental problems (fugitive dust, erosion, etc.) in reclamation plans.
Distance from Adjoining Property
Current regulations depend on the type of facility and the type of equipment in use. This makes regulations complex and difficult to interpret.
Recommendations:
Revise permits to define setbacks by the distance from the APO property line rather than the specific piece of equipment.
Require a setback of 880 yards for concrete batch plants.
Establish setback rules for all APOs that treat platted subdivisions as residential areas.
Groundwater Disruption
The committee found inconsistent groundwater conservation rules around the state. Many counties did not even have Groundwater Conservation Districts, or if they did, they could not assess the cumulative regional impact of APOs on water supply. Historic APO water use data is not readily available to the public.
Recommendations:
The Texas Water Development Board should complete an in-depth assessment of APO water use.
Study future water supply, especially for the Houston area, where sedimentation threatens Lake Houston.
Require APOs to recirculate groundwater to conserve groundwater resources.
Water Quality
The committee found that TCEQ regulations for APOs are less rigorous than for other types of surface mining enforced by the Railroad Commission.
APOs construct ponds based on their preferred ‘best management practice,’ often without rigorous engineering or regulatory inspection. Testimony from neighbors indicated sediment-laden discharge damaged property. TCEQ found that nearly half (42%) of APO enforcement actions (not related to registration) were due to noncompliance with water-quality rules.
Groundwater pollution by APOs is also a legitimate concern.
Recommendations:
Require Texas APOs to comply with requirements for Texas coal and uranium mines.
Improve rules and regulatory processes to provide a higher level of protection from pollution by APOs.
Provide more robust and frequent groundwater inspections.
Perform dye-trace studies to determine groundwater flow-paths in areas close to major water wells.
Sedimentation and Flooding
The committee found sand mining along the San Jacinto River to be one of the contributors of excess sedimentation. It also aggravated flooding issues in Montgomery and Harris Counties during and after Hurricane Harvey.
Also, “The result of partitioning large areas of the floodway from rising floodwaters by levees and dikes can result in increased flooding of adjacent areas. Flood-induced breaches in levees can also add to the problems of flooding and sedimentation downstream.”
Unfortunately, breaches and unauthorized discharges are sometimes left unreported and unrepaired unless citizens file reports to the TCEQ. Even when violations have been documented by the TCEQ, fines have been minimal, averaging ~$800/violation from 2013-2017. Worse, the TCEQ inspects mines only once every two years for the first six years, and then once every three years thereafter.
The committee also found that in-river mining has continued along the West Fork of the San Jacinto even though no permits have been granted by TPWD. TPWD enforcement appears to be lax. “Thus, it is likely regulations will have little or no effect on in-river mining.”
Minimize damage to stream banks and riparian vegetation by implementing erosion control requirements during construction, mining and post mining phases.
Establish minimum buffer zones between pits, streams, adjacent properties, public water supplies and domestic water wells.
Establish minimum widths and slopes for protective levees to avoid breaches.
Regularly monitor water-quality both from surface sampling and aerial surveillance during the active mining phase and at regular intervals after mine abandonment.
Municipal Ordinances
The report found that municipalities (as opposed to counties) already have the power to require minimum buffers in Public Health and Safety requirements and nuisance abatement ordinances. The committee specifically cited the City of Houston. But much mining remains outside of municipalities. So it recommended granting authority to counties to establish setbacks between incompatible land uses and to regulate water wells to avoid possible groundwater contamination.
Lack of Industry Cooperation
This report began by acknowledging the need for balance. However, it ended by complaining about the lack of industry cooperation.
For instance, TACA claimed that pushing facilities father from where products are needed will “add a tremendous amount of cost.” When the committee tried to investigate such economic claims, TACA refused to document them. The committee then reached out to trade groups in other states to substantiate TACA’s claims. However, all those groups refused to respond or simply ignored the requests.
That led to one final recommendation. Should concerns about the potential economic consequences become substantiated by reputable data, the legislature should institute a “Best Practices Compliance Incentive Program.”
It would require TCEQ to certify that all APOs trying to do business with the state comply with industry best practices.
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/RJR_4573.jpg?fit=1500%2C1000&ssl=110001500adminadmin2021-01-26 14:59:282021-02-02 12:15:13House Committee Releases Report on Sand Mining
Professor Emeritus William Dupré, Ph.D., of the University of Houston’s Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences filed a 36-page report with the TCEQ on sand mining in the San Jacinto River Basin. Dupré has broard experience with geologic hazards and risk assessment. He submitted his report in support of the petition filed with the TCEQ by the Lake Houston Area Grassroots Flood Prevention Initiative to establish best management practices (BMPs) for sand mining.
The first issue that Dupré identified is flooding. “With one exception, all sand mines in the San Jacinto River Watershed are located partially or completely within the regulatory floodway, an area delineated by FEMA as having the highest potential for flooding (and erosion) along major waterways. “[T]he floodway is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters which carry debris, potential projectiles and erosion potential…”. (Montgomery County Flood Plain Management Regulations, 2014, p.25)
Floodway Constriction
Dupré notes that partitioning large areas of the floodway from rising floodwaters by levees and dikes can result in increased flooding of adjacent areas.
A good example: sand mines on the north side the San Jacinto West Fork and I-45 have walled off half the floodplain, forcing floodwaters onto neighboring property on the south side.
Sand mines have walled off more than 200 acres west of I-45 and north of the San Jacinto West Fork. See below.The high dikes force floodwater to the other side of the river rather than allowing it to spread out on both sides.The concentration of water in a smaller area also increases the velocity and erosion. For close-up of area inside red circle, see image below.This shows how high the dike around the sand mine is.
Levee Failure Can Flush Pollutants into Waterways
“Flood-induced breaches in levees can also add to the problems of flooding, erosion, and sedimentation downstream,” Dupré says, flushing sediment and other pollutants into adjacent land, wetlands, and waterways. See two examples below.
In the top row, river migration eroded the pit wall which allowed the contents to drain into the West Fork near North Park Drive. In the bottom row, the entire contents of a mine pit drained into the West Fork near Bennett Estates.
In-Stream Mining Disrupts River Habitat
A. Google Earth image of point bar on the west Fork of the San Jacinto River; B. Same bar 5 months later showing un-permitted (i.e. illegal) In-stream “bar-scalping.”
“Since the passage of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Amendments of 1977, some states have heavily restricted or banned in-stream mining, as have many countries,” writes Dupré. “These restrictions are mainly based on the significant environmental problems associated with this type of mining.”
Such mining can create major disruptions of riparian habitats by increasing the amount of sediment put into suspension. “Major channel modifications can also occur, including upstream incision (headcutting) and downstream erosion and deposition.”
BMPs Can Make Compliance with Regulations More Efficient
In his paper, Dupré next examines applicable regulations and suggests several BMPs to supplement them. He recommends that:
All APO’s should develop and make available to regulators and the public a Comprehensive Mine Plan and an Environmental Assessment Report on potential impacts before permits are issued.
Likewise, all APO’s should develop and make available to regulators and the public a Reclamation Plan before permits are issued and file a performance bond ensuring reclamation before a production permit is granted. Such permits should have significant civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance.
New mining should be minimized or restricted in delineated floodplains and floodways and channel migration zones (areas most like to be eroded by lateral migration and river avulsion).
Mines should be “prohibited within the adopted regulatory floodway unless it has been demonstrated through hydrologic and hydraulic analyses that the proposed encroachment would not result in any increase in flood levels…. A development permit must be secured from the Flood Plain Administrator prior to the placement of fill or other encroachment in the floodway….” (Montgomery County Flood Plain Management Regulations, 2014).
Stockpiles should be located outside the floodway, because of the high potential for erosion (and resultant sediment pollution) during frequent flooding.
Conclusion
Dupré acknowledges that aggregate mining clearly provides valuable material and employment to the state and nation.
Nonetheless, Texas is one of the few states where sand and gravel mines remain largely unregulated. Issues related to flooding, erosion, and sedimentation create many unintended (and undesirable) environmental and economic impacts associated with sand and gravel mines – especially in the San Jacinto River watershed. “I believe there is a clear need for the requirement for BMP’s to better protect the public and the environment,” says Dupré.
TCEQ Public Comment Period Rapidly Coming to a Close For Sand Mining BMPs
On November 11, the TCEQ held a public hearing on a joint proposal between TACA and the Lake Houston Area Grassroots Flood Prevention Initiative to establish best management practices for sand mining in the San Jacinto watershed. The public comment period closes on December 11, 2020 – in just 12 days.
If you want to weigh in on the subject, you can review presentations from the hearing here. TACA and the Lake Houston Area people are in substantial agreement on most points. However, they still differ on four key issues.
Where should the BMPs be enforced? On the main stems of the East and West Forks or on the smaller tributaries, too?
Should there be performance bonds for reclamation?
How far from rivers should the sand mines be set back for safety reasons?
Should compliance with best practices should be voluntary or mandatory?
If you have comments or questions for the TCEQ, please e-mail Outreach@tceq.texas.gov. Make sure to include “Sand Mining Rulemaking” in the subject line of your e-mail.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/29/2020
1188 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/image.png?fit=455%2C269&ssl=1269455adminadmin2020-11-29 12:08:222020-11-29 12:14:14UH Geology Professor Weighs in with TCEQ on BMPs Related to Sand Mining
In the spirit of Halloween, it’s only fair to ask, “Is Perry Homes tricking or treating when it talks about Woodridge Village?” What Perry Homes says and what Perry does seem to contradict each other in a scary, horror-movie, Stephen-King, Cujo-on-steroids sort of way.
The Cujo analogy actually fits; man’s best friend turns into something not so nice. Woodridge Village is the 262-acre area that Perry contractors clear cut and then left before finishing the detention ponds. This contributed to the flooding of hundreds of homes in Elm Grove and North Kingwood Forest – twice so far this year.
Words vs. Actions
What do I mean by contradictions? A dozen examples:
Their consultant, LJA, promised the Montgomery County engineer that Woodridge would have no adverse impact on downstream flooding … then 200 homes flooded.
Equipment parked on the northern side of the site for a month moved to the western side but still is not working.
How could anyone take Perry Homes at its word any longer? They certainly aren’t a treat and they’re not tricking anyone. The courts need to put an end to the Nightmare Near Elm Grove.
Posted by Bob Rehak on Halloween, 10/31/2019, with that to Jeff Miller
793 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 42 days after Imelda
The thoughts expressed in this post are my opinions on matters of public policy and concern. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/RJR_3830.jpg?fit=1500%2C1000&ssl=110001500adminadmin2019-10-31 16:57:372019-10-31 17:14:07Perry Homes: Trick or Treat?
The National Weather Service just issued a FLASH FLOOD WARNING FOR OUR AREA. Extreme rainfall rates of 3-6 inches per hour could lead to extensive and rapid onset flash flooding. This flash flooding will be possible over the Humble, Kingwood, Huffman, Crosby areas if a line of thunderstorms progresses slightly more to the SSE over the next few hours.
Given saturated grounds and already high water levels in E/NE Harris County these sort of rainfall totals would result in significant run-off and flash flooding.
Travel is strongly discouraged in the Flash Flood Warning and Flash Flood Emergency areas.
Overnight, the remnants of TS Imelda continued to shift north. The heaviest rainfall occurred north and east of Houston. The East Fork of the San Jacinto is at flood stage at Splendora and New Caney. The NWS has issued multiple flood warnings for that area.
A band of intense rainfall with rates of 3-5 inches per hour continues from Conroe to Porter to Liberty to Winnie.
Conroe Airport recorded 5.16 inches of rain in the last hour.
This band of intense rainfall will move into the NE portions of Harris County over the next hour impacting areas around Kingwood, Humble, Huffman, and Crosby.
Flash flood warnings for much of the NE Houston, SE Montgomery County and W Liberty County that had been due to expire this morning have been extended to this evening.
Intense rainfall rates will result in rapid onset urban flash flooding. It is already in progress in SE Montgomery County.
Source: National Weather Service via SJRA.net
West Fork and Lake Conroe Well Within Banks
Overnight, the West Fork of the San Jacinto at the SH99 (Grand Parkway) received another three inches of rain.
Lewis Creek on Lake Conroe received two inches in the last couple of hours.
Lake Conroe is now at its seasonal lowering target of 199 feet (actual reading is 198.88). Until now, the lake had been about a half a foot lower than its target due to evaporation. Despite the rain, Lake Conroe is still two feet below its normal level of 201 feet. That means an additional two feet of buffer remains before the lake reaches its normal level. Another two feet remains beyond that before the lake would have to open its gates.
The West Fork at US59 is at 43.5 feet, a little up, but still six feet from coming out of its banks.
Source: Harris County Flood Warning System
Currently Lake Conroe is still releasing 0 cubic feet per second. I.e., NOTHING.
East Fork Getting Hammered
Over on the East Fork, it’s a much different story. The storm has hammered that area all night.
Caney Creek at FM2090 received 12 inches in the last 24 hours and almost 6 inches in the last six hours. And 4.5 inches between 6 and 7 am.
The East Fork at New Caney has risen 18 feet since yesterday and will continue rising. It is currently at 62.78 feet.
FM1485 is now under water and closed.
Peach Creek at Splendora rose 10 feet since yesterday.
The East Fork at 2090 received more than 14 inches of rain in the last 24 hours, more than 8 of those inches falling overnight. As a result, the stream rose another six feet since 2 a.m. Flooding is now likely.
Source: Harris County Flood Warning System
Source: Harris County Flood Warning System
Lake Houston Up Slightly
Lake Houston is at 42.78 feet. Normal is 42.38. As East Fork rains descend into the lake, we can expect a rise. How much depends on the amount of rain this morning across the region.
The remnants of Tropical Depression Imelda should continue to drift slowly north today as extremely warm and moist air flows into Southeast Texas.
This moisture will feed the development of slow moving and training thunderstorms with rainfall rates of 3 to 5 inches per hour.
A persistent swath of storms across Eastern Montgomery, Liberty and Chambers county should wobble north then south early this morning.
Storms should continue to expand and develop further to the west as far out as the College Station by mid to late morning. Eventually a band of rainfall should develop and amounts across the band of 3-5 inches should be common with isolated amounts near 10 inches while outside of the band heavy rainfall may be more scattered in nature with amounts of only 1 to 2 inches.
The heavy rains will not only cause street flooding but with the elevated river and bayou levels more river flooding is likely to occur. The flash flood watch may need to be extended this evening. The flood threat may begin to shift further north tonight toward the Madisonville and Huntsville and Crockett areas.
Worst to East; Consider Yourself Lucky
As bad as this sounds, it could be worse. Areas east of us received an incredible 17.24 inches of rainfall in 6 hours near HWY 124 with a storm total nearing 28 inches. Catastrophic flooding is in progress along I-10 between Winnie and Beaumont.
Protective Actions
DO NOT Travel. Wait until the threat of high water has passed.
Turn Around, Don’t Drown®: Do not drive through flooded areas. If you see water covering the road, do not attempt to cross it. Only a few inches of water can float a vehicle . If you find yourself in a dangerous situation where your vehicle is taking on water, get out of the vehicle, get to a higher position, and call 911.
Monitor Official Sources for Current Information: Harris County Flood Warning System (harriscountyfws.org), Houston TranStar (houstontranstar.org), and the National Weather Service Houston/Galveston Forecast Office (weather.gov/hgx).
Monitor Stream, Bayou, and Creek Conditions: Rain may move repeatedly across the same area, causing creeks and bayous to rise and possibly exceed their banks. Stay informed of current conditions and avoid traveling near creeks and bayous.
Avoid Traveling during Periods of Heavy Rain: Rain can reduce visibility and prevent you from seeing the road ahead, which could lead to accidents.
Posted by Bob Rehak at 7:30 a.m. on 9/19/2019
751 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/HGX_loop-1.gif?fit=600%2C550&ssl=1550600adminadmin2019-09-19 07:36:162019-09-19 08:08:21Thursday AM River, Lake Report for Lake Houston Area; Flash Flood Warning In Effect
Click on the Rainfall and/or Stream Elevation tabs to see graphic representations like those above.
Better yet, establish an account and sign up for automated alerts. You can customize your preferences or accept defaults for as many gages as you wish.
The ground is already saturated. So any additional rainfall will result in rapid runoff So good luck to East Fork residents tonight and tomorrow.
Jeff Lindner, Harris County Meteorologist says “Additional rainfall amounts of 2-4 inches with isolated amounts up to 6 inches will be possible in this area with totals west of I-45 generally less than 2 inches.”
Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/18/2019 at 6pm
750 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/790-1.png?fit=540%2C400&ssl=1400540adminadmin2019-09-18 18:17:542019-09-18 18:18:02East Fork Rose 11 Feet Today; Almost Out of Banks at FM1485
An article in the New York Times about a looming water crisis caught my eye today. Datelined Bangalore, India, the article describes how “Countries that are home to one-fourth of Earth’s population face an increasingly urgent risk: The prospect of running out of water.” So what does that have to do with flooding? Many of those countries also experience cyclic flooding. Sound familiar?
Uncanny Parallels to Houston
In yet another uncanny parallel to our situation – i.e., with the Water Wars in Montgomery County – “…some are squandering what water they have. Several are relying too heavily on groundwater, which instead they should be replenishing and saving for times of drought.”
In Chennai, India’s fourth largest city, residents accustomed to relying on groundwater for years now find none left. So the city is forced to transport water from farther and farther away (like our Luce Bayou Project). They lose significant amounts in the process due to evaporation and leakage.
The World Resources Institute expects the number of people worldwide living in “extremely high water stress” to nearly double in the next decade.
Cape Town, a city roughly the size of Houston, had to ration water last year.
Drought and Flooding Solutions Often Overlap
In Bangalore, lakes that once dotted the city have been filled in, much the way we fill in wetlands, so they can no longer collect rainwater and serve as the city’s water storage tanks.
That parallel reminded me of the dwindling water capacity in Lake Houston due to sedimentation. With backup supplies in Lake Livingston and Lake Conroe, Houston certainly doesn’t have to worry about running out of water any time soon. But as recent sedimentation surveys near the mouth bar showed, we do have to worry about loss of lake capacity.
Difference map developed by Tetra Tech for City of Houston in Feb/March, 2019, showing areas of deposition and scour near the West Fork Mouth Bar. Overall, Tetra Tech estimates that this small 350-acre area of Lake Houston gained 504-acre feet of sedimentsince the previous survey in 2011. Brown areas represent more than 5 FEET of deposition.
Drought and floods represent two sides of the same coin. This article reminded me that solutions to one problem can also help solve the other. For instance…
Developing adequate surface water supplies and saving ground water as the backup. This can reduce subsidence which can lead to flooding.
Improving lake/river capacity by dredging can eliminate blockages that also cause flooding.
As we move forward with West Fork and maintenance dredging, we should remember this. We aren’t just looking at costs that benefit Lake Houston residents. We’re looking at costs that benefit millions of residents in the larger metropolitan area. It’s not just about flooding. It’s also about water capacity for a rapidly growing population.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/6/2019
707 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/DifferenceMap.jpg?fit=2004%2C1340&ssl=113402004adminadmin2019-08-06 20:53:322019-08-06 21:01:50NY Times Article Says Quarter of Humanity Facing Looming Water Crisis
The equity flap continues. In its June 25th meeting, Harris County Commissioners Court voted 3-2 to take a portion of METRO fundingAWAY from Harris County Precincts 3 and 4. This vote impacts Precinct 4 constituents by $3,069,709 in road construction funds this year alone.
This attack was just a beginning. Commissioners Ellis and Garcia stated in a joint press conference that they seek to also go after portions of Precinct 3’s and 4’s Mobility Funds…based on…you guessed it…equity. Watch the video above all the way to the end. An estimated $6 million per year is at stake in Precinct 4.
Basis for Equity
The current formula for distribution of METRO and mobility funds accounts for the number of road miles each precinct must maintain.
Compared to precinct 4, Precinct 1 also has 38% of the lane miles, 42% of the asphalt roads, one third of the unincorporated land mass, and one fourth of the housing starts.
I don’t dispute the existence of “historically disadvantaged” ethnic groups. However, I do question why road funds should be distributed by race. It seems other factors such as need, area covered, growth rate, or population served relate more directly.
Highest Percentage of Unincorporated Population in Precinct 4
Historically speaking, the county’s mission is to provide services to unincorporated areas.
So let’s start this discussion by looking at the percentage of county residents within each precinct who live in unincorporated vs. incorporated areas, such as the City of Houston. Here we see that Precinct 4 must support virtually triple the the number of unincorporated residents that Precinct 1 supports. Residents who live in unincorporated areas have support other than the county to help meet their needs.
Precinct 4 must support virtually triple the the number of unincorporated residents that Precinct 1 supports.
Highest Percentage of Road Miles in Precinct 4
Another way to look at need is by the number of road miles that each precinct must maintain. Here we can see that Precinct 4 has more lane miles, thoroughfare miles, and open-ditch asphalt roads to support than Precinct 1 by wide margins.
Highest Percentage of Growth in Precinct 4
Growth rates also factor into need in a very direct way. Here again, we can see that Precinct 4 is growing faster than Precinct 1 by many measures.
Change in “total population” percentage (incorporated + unincorporated)
Change in unincorporated population percentage
New housing and apartment starts
Residents inside the City receive county funds, too. Precincts receive them based on a weighted formula.
Precinct 4 Also Has Larger Area to Cover than Precinct 1
From the table above, we can see that Precinct 4 also has about 6.51% more square miles to service than Precinct 1.
What Funds Go For
Precinct 4 maintains over 2,600 road miles and 327 bridges in a 72% unincorporated area.
Precinct 4 Commissioner Jack Cagle said, “These Mobility Funds maintain and construct roads that keep traffic moving. They also provide roadway access for a prompt response for law enforcement, fire and emergency medical services that will ensure the continued safety of all residents.”
The ditches that parallel those roads also play a huge role in carrying water away from neighborhoods, thus reducing the risk of flooding.
Subversion of Language
The inclusion of equity in the flood bond language seems to have opened a Pandora’s box. When I listen to Commissioner Ellis and when I look at hard data, I get the feeling that the meaning of “equity” is being distorted as part of a crass money grab. This isn’t equity. It’s Commissioner Ellis seeking reparations for misdeeds of generations past.
To me, equity in this context means a fair, just, impartial, or balanced distribution of funds.
Equity should be based on objective measures, such as area served, population served, or miles that must be maintained. Those should be debated openly.
The way Commissioner Ellis uses the word, however, the outcome becomes the opposite of equity. Money is not distributed based on per capita, per road mile, or per square mile. It’s based on racial preference and results in an inequitable distribution of funds based on other objective measures.
It’s hard to reason with someone flaming about racial injustice 200 years ago. And Mr. Ellis, like most demagogues, knows that. He also exploits it. I just hope he doesn’t kill growth in Harris County while he’s doing it. Because that’s where he’s headed…including (insiders say) redirecting money from the flood bond.
Voice your opinion at the next Commissioners Court meeting on Tuesday, July 9
Commissioners Court meetings are open to the public and begin at 10:00 a.m. at 1001 Preston Street, Suite 934, Houston, Texas 77002. However, if you wish to speak, you must complete the online appearance request form found at:
It is now very typical for Commissioners Court to go beyond 6 hours.
Those who do not state an agenda item when they sign up are usually forced to wait until the end of the session. However, you can insert the agenda item in the “Subject Matter” box when you sign up. This should increase the probability of you speaking earlier.
Agenda item 19.e.1.b Mobility Funding includes this topic You can also put any additional description that you want in the subject description box.
U. S. Mail: The Honorable Judge Lina Hidalgo 1001 Preston, Suite 911 Houston, TX 77002
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/7/2019
677 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Lane-Miles.jpg?fit=900%2C1350&ssl=11350900adminadmin2019-07-07 20:42:482019-07-08 07:08:23Harris County Precinct 4 METRO and Mobility Funding Also Under “Equity” Attack in Commissioners Court
Photo looking west toward Yates property just out of frame on right. Developer continues to build site up relative to neighbors – before installing drainage. This has created problems for Chris Yates and his neighbors in Porter.
Some more bad news surfaced today for the people whose drainage has been affected by Woodridge Village construction activity. Rebel Contractors has built up the level of Woodridge before installing drainage between Woodridge and neighbors. As a result, water has ponded in Porter yards for months and damaged their property. Then, to add insult to injury, about a week after finally erecting a long-awaited silt fence, Rebel Contractors covered it with dirt.
Woodridge: The Yates Family Curse
Chris Yates, who lives at 25395 Needham Road in Porter, sent me these pictures today. They show how construction activity has affected his property. First up: two BEFORE shots showing his happy family in front of the Woodridge site.
Yates’ daughter Amber in back yard before clearcutting began. Looking east. A small ditch ran through the tree line which forms the property line between Yates and Woodridge. Note the telephone lines at the top of the picture for reference in subsequent photos.
Yates with family in happier times. This was taken after construction began but before water started piling up.Note piles of dirt being stacked up on Woodridge property in background.
After clearcutting and grading of the Woodridge property in the background, water started collecting in Yates’ yard. This rain fell in March and remained there until Friday, May 31, when Yates pumped it out.
Contractor Should Have Maintained Positive Drainage at All Times
Page 6/Point 12 of the Woodridge Village Detention Plan states that, “Contractor shall maintain positive drainage from construction site at all times. Any damage to existing ditch system as the result of the contractor’s activities shall be repaired to existing or better conditions.” Oops! Neighbors up and down the western border of Woodridge have experienced stagnant water. Some have even experienced flooding.
Almost 4 Feet of Standing Water Before Any Drains Away
The Yates back yard on May 7. Their four-foot fence is barely visible in these two shots taken as water built up. It could not drain away according to Yates until the stormwater crested at a high point to the south between his home and Sherwood Trails..
This recent shot shows how the standing water killed Yates’ grass. Silty runoff ponded for two months.
Today, Yates pumped the water out to his street drain. It took him eight hours, pumping at 3,700 gallons per hour. While this kind of damage does not compare to the loss of a home, I’m sharing this story because it seems to illustrate the contractor’s disregard for the problems it causes neighbors.
Yates raises several animals on his property but has had to keep them caged for months because of the standing water.
Detention plans show that developer knew runoff was moving west to east toward development.Page 12 of the Water, Sanigtary Sewer and Drainage Facilities & Paving Appurtenances Planshows that developer was expecting to compensate for 10-aces of offside drainage from the Yates neighborhood, but didn’t start installing the storm drains for months, until well after three heavy May rains.
Looking north from Yates back yard along western boundary of Woodridge. Note the standing water between development and neighbors. The Woodridge side of the property (right) was elevated approximately 3 feet before drainage was installed.Photo taken 5/31/2019.
Plans show that this drain should eventually handle water that collects between Yates’ property and Woodridge. Question: Why wasn’t this installed before the Woodridge property was elevated?Said Yates who has years of construction experience, “Drainage is put in by elevation so this could have been put in before building up.”Photo taken 5/31/2019.
More Out-of-Sequence Construction?
Yates, whose father owned a clearing/grading business, worked in the family business when younger and said that on a site like this, they typically installed drainage first thing. The reason: ponding water slows down construction. “Even though it takes time, it saves time,” said Yates. “You can’t work when the site is wet. Construction on this site seems to be out of sequence.”
Yates also said that he had talked to the developer and learned they were six months behind schedule. One can only wonder whether the delayed installation of drainage had anything to do with the construction delays.
This and detention ponds were not the only out-of-sequence construction that neighbors have suffered through. Silt fences should have been installed before clear cutting started. Instead, they were put up almost a year later.
Additionally, the developer finally installed silt fences last week. The developer was supposed to install them before clearcutting began. For months, residents complained about sand, silt and clay pouring out of the construction site into streets and storm drains. Then about a week or so ago, after a complaint to the TCEQ triggered an investigation, silt fences finally appeared. Now they are buried under dirt again.
1-2 Week old silt fence … buried under silt. Said Yates, “What’s the point of silt fences if you are piling dirt on top of them an on the other side of them?” Photo taken 5/31/2019.
Chris Yates must feel at this point as though he’s Rodney Dangerfield. “Can’t get no respect.” Let’s hope he and the hundreds of other families affected by Woodridge construction find some before this is all over.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/1/2019 with images courtesy of Chris and Tammy Yates of Porter
641 Days since Hurricane Harvey
All thoughts expressed in this post are my opinions on matters of public policy and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Yates-Muck-Today.jpg?fit=700%2C933&ssl=1933700adminadmin2019-05-31 23:10:392019-06-01 00:00:20Woodridge Problems Still Piling Up for Porter Resident Chris Yates
