Tag Archive for: gates

Harris County Flood Control Updates Project List for Flood Bond

The Harris County Flood Control District has updated the project list for the upcoming flood bond referendum. This will be the last update before early voting starts on August 8.

Location of proposed projects in San Jacinto Watershed

There are several earlier versions of this list that do not include all of the most recent projects that have been added for the Lake Houston area. Make sure you review the most current list before voting.

The Lake Houston Area Chamber and the Lake Houston Area Grassroots Flood Prevention Initiative lobbied long and hard to get items on this list including additional:

  • Upstream detention
  • Dredging of the East and West Forks
  • Floodgates for the Lake Houston Dam

These three items comprised the so-called Plea for DDG (detention, dredging and gates). They have been added to the project list and will be in the bond proposal that people vote on. To review all projects that could affect you, make sure you also look upstream in the Spring and Cypress Creek Watersheds.

Early voting starts August 8 and the Kingwood Community Center. Here is the complete list of early voting hours and dates.

Wednesday, August 8, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Thursday, August 9, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Friday, August 10, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Monday, August 13, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Tuesday, August 14, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Wednesday, August 15, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Thursday, August 16, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Friday, August 17, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Saturday, August 18, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Sunday, August 19, 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Monday, August 20, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Tuesday, August 21, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

The final day for voting is August 25 at your normal polling place. To find your polling place, follow this link.

The August 1 list includes partnership projects that could bring in additional funds through matching grants. They could potentially total another $3.1 billion.

For complete details on the bond proposal, visit the Harris County Flood Control District website and click on Bond.

This list must be approved by Commissioner’s Court. Their next meeting is August 14.

Posted by Bob Rehak on August 4, 2018

340 Days since Hurricane Harvey

County Position on More Detention, Dredging and Gates for Flood Bond

Today, I received feedback from Harris County on adding “more detention, dredging and gates” (Plea for DDG) to the upcoming flood bond referendum. The good news: Additional dredging, detention and gates will be achievable within the bond. The bad news: based on the feedback, there is still one hurdle to clear: finding partners to share dredging costs.

The mouth bar where the West Fork meets Lake Houston. Fosters Mill and King’s Point are in the background.

Background on Plea for DDG: Detention, Dredging and Gates

You may recall that RecoverLakeHouston, the Lake Houston Area Chamber, and the Lake Houston Area Grass Roots Flood Prevention Initiative (as well as I) all lined up to support the Plea for DDG. The idea: during floods, more detention, dredging and gates would reduce input, increase throughput and speed up output.

Giant Turnout

The community turned out in force to support the initiative. The response literally overwhelmed county officials at the meeting. Seven to eight hundred people attended, making it the most attended of all the watershed meetings to date. Typically, meetings have been drawing one to two hundred people according to those who have attended multiple meetings.

Because of the large number of attendees in Kingwood and the open house format, many people felt the meeting was somewhat chaotic. Worse, some attendees received feedback from a small number of the county employees who mistakenly told them that dredging was NOT possible under the bond.

Clearing up the Confusion

I received this email from the county today. It clarifies their position on all three requests:

Thank you for your input in support of #PleaForDDG for the San Jacinto River watershed.  Your submission has been recorded and considered by the Harris County Flood Control District staff.

With regard to drainage improvements for the the San Jacinto River watershed, the Flood Control District is partnering with Montgomery County, the City of Houston and the San Jacinto River Authority to determine short-term and long-term improvements, such as:

  • Expanding the Flood Warning System (http://www.harriscountyfws.org) into Montgomery County to include new rainfall and stream level gages
  • Improved coordination between the two county Offices of Emergency Management during disasters
  • A vegetation and sediment management plan with the goal to reduce the amount of silt and sand eroding into the river
  • Regional mitigation projects such as river dredging, buyouts and detention basins

Dredging to restore the San Jacinto River and Lake Houston

On July 6, 2018, the US Army Corps of Engineers awarded a contract to Great Lakes Dredge and Dock, in the amount of $69,814,060 to remove sediment and debris resulting from Hurricane Harvey from the West Fork of the San Jacinto River. The Bond Program does include funding that could provide a portion of the cost share for any future dredging work on the East Fork/West Fork/Lake Houston area. Any future dredging project would have to be a collaborative effort between the City of Houston, the Coastal Water Authority, and possibly the State of Texas. At this time, no details have been worked out on future dredging. The Flood Control District will update the Bond Program maps to indicate another Partnership Project (green cross symbol) within the San Jacinto River watershed exhibit noting East Fork/West Fork/Lake Houston Dredging. The description will be “Potential Partnership Project with the City of Houston, Coastal Water Authority, and the State of Texas to permit, design, and complete dredging of the East Fork/West Fork/Lake Houston area waterways to reduce flooding risks.” The dollar amount will be shown as $50M from Harris County Flood Control District and TBD (to be determined) for the City of Houston, the Coastal Water Authority, and the State of Texas. The Flood Control District cannot commit nor obligate other agencies to allocate funding due to the fact that there is no agreement in place for the dredging project.

Detention/Sediment Basins West and North of Highway 59

These improvements are included in the list of potential projects within the bond program (see local projects F-88, F-14, and F-15 which will be used for Planning, Right-Of-Way Acquisition, Design and Construction of General Drainage Improvement along the San Jacinto River and Cypress Creek west of Highway 59). For drainage improvements north of Highway 59, the Flood Control District is coordinating with Montgomery County on a watershed study to investigate flooding problems and identify where detention basins could best serve to reduce flooding risks along the San Jacinto River.

Tainter Gates on Lake Houston Dam

On July 10, 2018, as a result of the community input process, the Flood Control District has added a Partnership Project (green cross symbol) to the list of potential projects within the bond program for the design and construction of additional gates. The partners would be the City of Houston and the Coastal Water Authority since they are the entities that have jurisdiction over the lake and the dam structure; our agency does not. The Bond Program could, however, provide partial funding of up to $20M for this effort.

When considering project ideas suggested by the community, the Flood Control District will prioritize projects that meet its mission to provide flood damage reduction projects that work, with appropriate regard for community and natural values. You can learn more about the project ranking criteria on our website: https://www.hcfcd.org/bond-program/community-input/

Thank you again for sharing your input. The bond election will be held on August 25 with early voting on August 8.

After reading this, I emailed Harris County Flood Control for one more clarification. Was spending $50 million on dredging contingent upon finding partners to share the cost? The answer: Yes. Fifty million, they say, is not sufficient by itself to do the dredging necessary.

So Where Does that Leave Us?

Additional gates for Lake Houston seem to be within scope and well supported.

More upstream detention seems to be within scope and also well supported. However, before any action can take place, the San Jacinto Watershed study must be completed. It is rumored to cost around $2 million and has been awaiting funding since late March. Presumably, the County’s share of the funding would come from this bond if it passes. The study would take a year or more to complete.

No one can say at this time what the study’s recommendations would be. So there is some uncertainty surrounding the request for more upstream detention. Please note, however, that other groups further upstream, for instance on Cypress Creek, are also requesting more upstream detention. My feeling? If the bond passes, more upstream detention is very likely. However, of all the projects, detention would take the longest to complete because it involves identifying and acquiring land.

Finally, additional dredging is also within scope and well supported. However, dredging has the highest degree of uncertainty associated with it because it will require partners who have not been approached and who have not committed any dollars.

To reduce uncertainty surrounding dredging before the bond, we would likely have to obtain commitments from one or more other stakeholders who are mentioned in the email above.

Recommended Next Steps

Before the bond referendum, area leaders need to actively seek support from those other stakeholders and communicate the outcome so that voters can make informed decisions about their votes. Of all three measures, dredging could be implemented the quickest.

In the meantime, residents should continue to submit their requests for more detention, dredging and gates. A groundswell of support will help send a message to the county’s potential partners.

Posted July 17, 2018 by Bob Rehak

322 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Lake Houston Chamber Launches Plea for DDG

The Lake Houston Chamber has launched its latest campaign in a series of flood mitigation efforts. Called the “Plea for DDG,” it is designed to:

  • Help educate residents and business owners about three key proposals that could address the root causes of flooding in the Lake Houston Area
  • Help turn out a crowd at Harris County’s flood bond meeting on July 10, 6 p.m., at Kingwood Park High School.

Purpose of Flood Bond Meeting

The purpose of the flood bond meeting is to solicit input from residents on the things that they believe will best help the largest numbers of people.

DDG: More Detention, Dredging and Gates

DDG stands for more Detention, Dredging and Gates, three proposals that will reduce flooding here.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is NOT addressing this giant sand bar in its dredging project – a big reason why we need to get the County to address additional dredging in its flood bond package. 

Harvey taught us that we had vulnerabilities. We had more water coming downstream than the San Jacinto’s current channel and the Lake Houston Dam could handle in a timely way. We need to fix those problems so residents know that a 1% storm will leave a home above the 100-year flood plain high and dry. Likewise for a 500-year flood. To do that:

Less input. More throughput. Faster output.

It’s simple. Logical. Achievable. And should restore drainage to original design assumptions.

Now we just need to get enough people to show up and request these things at the bond meeting for the county to include them in the bond package.

Drag your friends, relatives and neighbors to this meeting…especially the ones that didn’t flood.

Remind them that the flood affected this entire community. Tell them why more detention, dredging and gates are so important.

Get them to request more dredging, detention and gates from the County. These three measures could help virtually everyone who lives in the area.

DDG: A two step process

We have to make sure we get the right measures into the bond package. Then we have to get people to vote for it.

Right now, nothing is more important to the future of this area.

This bond package will be used to:

  • Pay for capital projects outright
  • Qualify us for federal matching grants that could triple the amount of dollars available to us (beyond the amount voters approve).
  • Free up money in the Flood Control District’s current capital budget so that the Distict can step up maintenance on ditches (which we also desperately need).

So tell everyone you know to “Plea for DDG” – more detention, dredging and gates – at the bond meeting on July 10, 2018, 6-8 p.m., at Kingwood Park High School.

For more information about the Chamber’s campaign, see recoverLakeHouston.com.

Posted 7/2/2018 by Bob Rehak

308 days since Hurricane Harvey

Lake Houston Area’s Most Pressing Needs for Flood Bond Referendum

On August 25, Harris County residents will vote on a historic flood bond proposal. Everyone asks, “Will the bond include projects that help this area?”

That of course, raises the question, “What does the Lake Houston Area need?”

We Must Address Root Causes of Flooding HERE

Several factors make flooding here different from other parts of the region. Since Harvey, I’ve corresponded almost daily with experts in geology, hydrology, sedimentation, meteorology, city planning, engineering, mining, and disaster relief. The goal: to identify root causes of flooding in THIS area. They fall into three main “buckets”:

  • Sedimentation. Sand and silt clog the San Jacinto everywhere. The Army Corps’ emergency dredging project will remove only part of the sand from a 2.1 mile stretch of the West Fork, and not even touch the East Fork. One of the largest blockages at the mouth of the West Fork will remain. And the Corps will only restore the areas it dredges to pre-Harvey conditions, not pre-1994 conditions.
  • Releases from the dam at Lake Conroe can increase the volume of water flowing between Humble and Kingwood by ONE-THIRD. Of the roughly 240,000 cubic feet per second flowing down the west fork, 80,000 cubic feet of water per second came from the Lake Conroe dam. Many Lake Houston area residents say the onset of flooding coincided with release from Lake Conroe.
  • We have a bottleneck at Lake Houston. In a flood, much more water converges on Lake Houston than Lake Conroe. At the peak of Harvey, Lake Houston took in 492,000 cubic feet per second whileLake Conroe took in only 130,000 CFS. Seven different watersheds converge on Lake Houston. Yet until water reaches the spillway of the dam, our floodgates have one-tenth the discharge capacity of Lake Conroe’s. This effectively eliminates pre-release as a mitigation strategy.

We Need Specific Solutions, Not Generic

True solutions to flooding in the Lake Houston area must address these unique challenges. Generic solutions, such as buyouts with bond money  will help, but won’t affect many people. Pushing new development further away from rivers will help, but will not restore the carrying capacity of the San Jacinto, increase the discharge rate of the Lake Houston dam, or offset discharges from Lake Conroe.

We Need: Dredging, Detention, More Gates

The objective of the Lake Houston Area’s flood mitigation efforts should be, in my opinion and the opinion of many engineers, to restore our drainage systems to their original design capacity. Homes located outside of the 1% (100-year) risk area should not flood until we get a 1% flood. The same goes for the .02% level (500-year flood).

Experts generally focus on three categories of solutions that will help achieve those objectives: dredging, detention and greater discharge capacity for the dam, i.e., adding more gates. We need all three. No one solution will do the job by itself.

Additional DREDGING can remove sediment, restore carrying capacity, eliminate water backing up, and get us back to level of the original design assumptions.

Additional  DETENTION on the West Fork will help offset discharges from the Lake Conroe dam, which affected the heavily populated area between Humble and Kingwood, where the worst and most damage took place.

Additional GATES on Lake Houston will help relieve the bottleneck created by the different discharge rates between Lake Conroe and Lake Houston.

Here’s a diagram that shows what we need in the flood bond, where we need it, and why.

Reduce flooding in the Lake Houston Area with additional dredging, detention and drainage.

Of the three types of projects, dredging is the easiest and fastest to implement. It can buy us time while we build additional dams and gates. That could take years.

More Explanation to Follow

I will elaborate on each of these in coming days.

Harris County Commissioners and executives from the Flood Control District will hold a meeting in Kingwood on July 10 to solicit input from the community on the flood bond.

Hopefully, this series of posts will help focus discussion on the things that will do the most good for the largest number of people at the lowest cost.

Mark Your Calendars for July 10

In the meantime, mark your calendars for July 10. The County wants your input. Get your friends and neighbors to do the same. If you want peace of mind, we need to restore our ditches, rivers, and drainage systems to their original design capacity.

The location of the bond meeting may change because of the expected turnout and need for parking. So check back often.

Posted June 26, 2018, by Bob Rehak, 14 days before the flood bond meeting and…

301 days since Hurricane Harvey.

Top Priorities for Lake Houston Area Flood Mitigation

The fast-approaching Harris County Flood Bond referendum on August 25 is forcing people to focus on their top mitigation priorities.

Harris County Flood Control Bond Page at https://www.hcfcd.org/bond-program/.

Here is the current list of projects included in the Bond Proposal. Scroll down to page 7 to see those associated with the San Jacinto Watershed as of 6/1/18. Only one item from MY top four is currently on the County’s priority list.

Here are four things that I think would make the biggest impact for this area. Do you agree?

Top Priorities

  1. More river dredging. We must restore the velocity and carrying capacity of the entire river, not just a small portion of the West Fork and not just to pre-Harvey conditions.  The Army Corps of Engineers is restoring a 2-mile stretch to pre-Harvey conditions. But we need to dredge deeper and further. And we need to do it on a regular basis. In 2000, Brown & Root recommended dredging and periodic maintenance as the best option they examined to mitigate flooding. Neither was ever done. That’s a huge part of the reason why we face increased flood risk today. Personally, I’d like to see the East and West Forks restored to their 2000 condition.
  2. More floodgates on Lake Houston. Freese and Nichols found that 14 additional gates could have lowered the flood level during Harvey by up to 1.9 feet. That could help reduce flooding both upstream and downstream from the dam. It could also help reduce flooding downstream. By releasing water before a storm hits in a gradual, controlled fashion, you can create more capacity within the lake so you can discharge water at a lower rate as the reservoir fills back up.
  3. More upstream detention. Offset Lake Conroe releases by capturing and holding water elsewhere. Everybody from here to Waller County seems to be lobbying for this. Small dams along the streams and bayous could temporarily hold back flood waters before they reach highly populated areas. Spring and Cypress Creeks are popular candidates. Lake Creek has also been mentioned. Finally, TACA pointed out that sand mines could make excellent detention ponds – my favorite alternative.
  4. Better ditch maintenance. Before Harvey, many of our drainage ditches became silted and clogged with fallen trees. Some, like Ben’s Branch, near the public library, still have islands and standing water in them. Keeping these ditches clear and free flowing should be a high priority at all times to eliminate internal flooding.

Consensus Starting to Emerge

Monday, at separate meetings of the Lake Houston Area Grass Roots Flood Prevention Initiative and the Recover Lake Houston Task Fork, I saw consensus emerging around these flood mitigation measures. Together, these top priorities seem to have the best chance of actually reducing flooding in the Lake Houston area.

What are your top priorities? Whether you agree or disagree with these, please communicate your thoughts to Harris County Flood Control ASAP. The County is actively soliciting ideas for the bond proposal right now.

According to Community Impact, Judge Ed Emmett said the county hopes to have a final list of projects to share with the public by Aug. 1. Early voting will begin on Aug. 8. Thus, we have only six weeks to influence the project list.

Leveraging Local Dollars

County bond money can be used to leverage Federal matching funds from FEMA and HUD grants. These grants usually operate on a 75/25 or 90/10 basis, returning $3 to $9 for every dollar put up. If voters approve the$2.5 billion referendum, it could potentially bring in tens of billions of additional dollars. This flow chart explains how the Flood Control District’s funding works.

Federal dollars for Harvey flood mitigation efforts are available now, but may go elsewhere if we don’t act. So it’s important that we:

  • Make sure the language in the proposed bond accommodates our needs
  • Pass the bond
  • Focus the money where it will do the most good

Here is where the proposed bond language stands as of this date. See BondLanguageAsOf6.13.18.  It will most likely be modified before voting begins, based on what officials hear from citizens at a series of meetings being held in all 22 watersheds throughout Harris County.

Give the County Your Thoughts

Remember, according the Greater Houston Flood Mitigation Consortium, the Lake Houston area historically has received 0% of the region’s flood mitigation dollars, but sustained 14% of the region’s damage during Harvey. Let’s make sure we get our fair share of flood control dollars this time around.

Call 713-684-4107 or mail comments to 9900 Northwest Freeway, Houston, Texas 77092, ATTN: Bond Program Communications.

Come to the meeting with Judge Ed Emmett at the Kingwood Community Center on July 10 from 6 to 8 pm. Learn more about bond proposal and give the Judge your feedback directly.

Posted by Bob Rehak 6/13/2018

288 days since Hurricane Harvey

Freese and Nichols study finds more gates on Lake Houston dam could have lowered flood during Harvey

A study by consulting firm Freese and Nichols looked at the value of adding flood gates to the Lake Houston Dam. It found that during Harvey, new gates would have lowered the level of flooding around Lake Houston by up to 1.9 feet depending on the number of gates added. Obviously, the gates by themselves won’t protect us from another Harvey, but they are an important part of a comprehensive solution that includes ongoing river dredging, ditch maintenance, debris removal, additional upstream retention, and better warning systems and more.

Modeling the Effect of More Gates on a Harvey-type Flood

Freese and Nichols conducted the gate study, which modeled flood levels only for the Hurricane-Harvey case. It did not address the impact of adding gates on smaller floods, such as those that occurred in 1994, 1998, 2001, 2015 and 2016.

Extent of modeling in Freese and Nichols study on the effects of adding floodgates to Lake Houston

Would Pre-release Help with a Storm as Big as Harvey?

Additional gates were originally proposed as a concept that could enable pre-release of water from Lake Houston as a flood mitigation strategy. The idea behind a pre-release strategy is to lower the level of a lake BEFORE a storm. The lake then has more capacity to absorb heavy rains before overflowing its banks and flooding residents, much as the City of Houston did before a small flood at the end of March.

Pre-release is currently difficult for Lake Houston because the dam consists mainly of a spillway with a fixed height – 42.5 feet above mean sea level. The Lake Houston dam does have two small gates, but they have less than one tenth the capacity of the flood gates on Lake Conroe. This makes it difficult to coordinate discharges between the two lakes.

The SJRA repeatedly cited fear of overloading the Lake Houston watershed as a reason for delaying its release from the Lake Conroe dam during Harvey. Additional gates might have reduced those concerns, encouraging the SJRA to release water earlier.

Theoretically, that could have reduced the volume of water coming down the west fork at the peak of the storm. At the peak, Lake Conroe’s release constituted one third of all the water coming down the West Fork where most of the damage occurred. It’s therefore easy to see how reducing the peak flow down the west fork could have spared hundreds of homes and businesses.

However, Freese and Nichols found that the volume of water coming into the lake during Harvey from multiple sources was too great to realize much benefit from pre-release. The amount pre-released would have quickly filled back up again  – within a few hours.

Primary Benefit Comes from Additional Discharge Capacity

This does not mean that Freese and Nichols recommended against adding gates. They found that gates would have benefitted the community, but in a different way than originally anticipated. Surprisingly, they found that the largest reduction in flood levels came simply from the additional discharge capacity that the gates provided during the peak of the flood.

Freese and Nichols states in its conclusion, “Adding additional gates to the spillway at Lake Houston would be a feasible alternative to allow for additional discharge capacity to reduce the impact of very large flood events.  … Though additional gates would provide the ability to lower the lake quickly in advance of an anticipated major flood event, the additional capacity of the gates would have far more impact on the flood level than any preliminary lowering of the lake.”

Cost/Benefit Ratio

Like many engineering studies, Freese and Nichols says that any decision to build the gates depends on whether elected officials find benefits worth the costs. However, the scope of the study did not include cost savings to home and business owners. So let’s look at that.

FEMA, the agency that would likely pay for most of the gates evaluates projects primarily on the number of people helped. They want to provide the most “benefit-per-buck” possible.

Looking at the world from FEMA’s Point of View

The City of Houston is currently in the process of developing the FEMA grant application. Mayor Sylvester Turner stated at a community meeting in Kingwood in March that he supported 10 additional gates, which he estimated would cost $47 million.

FEMA estimated in November of 2017 that 16,000 homes and 3,300 businesses in the Lake Houston area were damaged. Therefore, to reduce the impact of flooding, this project would require an expenditure of less than $2,500 per structure. Repairs to flooded structures in virtually all cases cost 10 to 100 times more than that. I know of at least one case where repairs cost $600,000. It doesn’t take many of those to equal the cost of the additional gates that the mayor proposed – $47 million.

The gates would completely eliminate flooding at the edge of the flood, and would reduce the depth of flooding inside of that.

It’s not clear at this point how many homes sit within that band where flooding could have been  eliminated. Nor is there a precise estimate of damage to those homes.

Calculating the Value of Flood Reduction

Looking at homes that would seen reduced flooding, it’s important to note that the cost of repairs correlates highly with the level of flooding. According to Bill Fowler, a real estate tax expert and Co-Chair of the Lake Houston Area Grass Roots Flood Prevention Initiative, the Harris County Appraisal District is lowering valuations on homes by the amount of flooding they experienced.

Lowering flood levels usually lowers repair costs. Lower flood levels can also lower flood insurance costs, losses to insurance companies, damage to contents, and damage to vehicles. Value can be measured many ways.

It’s also important to note when calculating value in floods smaller than Harvey, pre-release might actually become a viable strategy and greatly reduce or eliminate flooding altogether. Freese and Nichols did not evaluate additional gates from that perspective; they considered only Harvey-level flooding.

Adding floodgates to Lake Houston will be a valuable flood mitigation tool. It must be viewed as an essential PART of the solution, not THE solution. Consider its value within the context of other mitigation efforts, such as dredging, ditch maintenance, and additional upstream storage capacity.

Posted June 10 by Bob Rehak

285 Days since Hurricane Harvey