Tag Archive for: HCFCD

Latest Spending Trends: Flood-Mitigation Quarterly Update

Numbers for Harris County Flood Control District’s (HCFCD) first quarter are in. They show several spending trends.

Spending Decline Continues

They show that the pace of overall flood-mitigation spending continues to decline, though there are signs that it could turn around soon – depending on your basis of comparison.

Year over year, the totals show a pronounced decline. Annualized first-quarter spending is now less half of what it was at the post-Harvey peak in 2020.

All data for this and other graphs in this post was compiled from HCFCD spreadsheets in response to a FOIA request.

To underscore that trend, spending declined from $74 million to $51 million between the last quarter of 2023 and the first quarter of 2024 – a 31% decrease in one quarter. So I checked for seasonality.

Spending often drops between the fourth and first quarters, but it’s not consistent.

From the 7-year chart above, you can see that spending dropped five times after the holidays and increased two.

However, change the basis of comparison and you can see an encouraging sign. If you compare the first quarter of 2023 with the first quarter of 2024, the spending is up by 20% – from about $41 million to $51 million.

Where the Money Goes by Watershed

Harris County has 23 watersheds. The chart below shows the total of HCFCD spending in each since Hurricane Harvey. Variation between Brays on the high end and Galveston Bay on the low is more than 100 to 1.

From data supplied by HCFCD in response to FOIA request

Comparing the graphs above and below shows where the action shifted in Q1. Notice that Brays shifts from first to eighth place. White Oak moves from fourth to first. And Halls jumped from ninth to third.

To learn more about specific projects in each of these watersheds, click on a watershed’s link on HCFCD’s home page.

What Drives Investments in Some Watersheds and Not in Others

To a large extent: damage and political priorities. I compiled the chart below from Harris County Federal Reports. One of the first things you notice is that Brays is on the left and Galveston Bay is toward the right.

Data compiled from HCFCD Federal Reports

The next two charts show how prioritizing projects in low-to-moderate income (LMI) areas can skew spending in different watersheds. The first shows LMI funding since Harvey. The second shows LMI funding in the first quarter of 2024. Comparing them, you can see how higher and higher percentages of the total are going to watersheds with a majority of LMI residents.

In the longer run, about half the money has gone to watersheds with a majority LMI population. But currently, about two-thirds goes to LMI-majority watersheds.

Keep in mind that although you see two categories in these pie charts, the categories are not equal. The blue area contains eight watersheds and the orange area 15 – almost twice as many. Said another way…

Half as many watersheds now get twice as much money.

The eight LMI watersheds include: Brays, Greens, White Oak, Halls, Sims, Hunting, Vince, and Goose Creek/Spring Gully.

The government defines LMI as “below the average income for the region.” In the other 15 areas, a majority of residents make “above the average income for the region.”

Harris County uses an Equity Prioritization Formula to select projects it will fund. The formula places a premium the percentage of low-to-moderate income individuals who live in an area. The theory: low-income families are less able to repair their homes after a flood.

Other Variables Skew Funding

The deeper you dig into these numbers, the more you can see other variables that skew funding, too.

  • Dense building next to bayous can increase cost of land for mitigation projects by making buyouts necessary to widen channels or build stormwater detention basins.
  • Previous mitigation spending – Some watersheds received extensive mitigation before Harvey.
  • Spending by others, i.e., the Army Corps, which is not reflected here
  • Timing of studies – Some studies that would justify grants haven’t even been completed yet, whereas others completed before Harvey were shovel ready when the flood bond came along.
  • Land acquisition and construction represent the two largest component costs of flood mitigation. Some large projects haven’t reached those stages yet.
  • Building code variations – Newer codes generally stipulate safer standards, reducing flood risk and damage in newer areas at no cost to the public.
  • Frontier Program – The county sometimes acquires land in developing areas to prevent future flood damage. Prevention is always cheaper than correction, but that land can be expensive.
  • Speed of partnership funding – Just last week, Harris County, the City of Houston and GLO reached an agreement related to $322 million in Harvey Disaster Relief Funds. That will make more money available to watersheds that were heavily damaged during Harvey.
  • Protection of employment centers, such as the Medical Center, Downtown, the Ship Channel, etc.

Someday soon, I hope to do a series of posts on projects within each watershed and the specifics of why they were funded.

The San Jacinto Gap

For now, let me discuss just one. The San Jacinto is Harris County’s largest watershed. It had the highest flooding in the County during Harvey. It also had a quarter of all the flood-related deaths during Harvey.

The San Jacinto had the eighth most damage, but ranks 13th in funding since Harvey. Of the twelve watersheds that received more funding, five had less damage. 

  • Cypress Creek has received more than 4X the San Jacinto. 
  • Little Cypress has received 3X more.
  • Addicks has received 2.5X more.
  • Clear Creek and Willow Creek have each received approximately 50% more.

And most of those watersheds have more affluent populations than the San Jacinto. So how do you account for the gap between severity of flooding and flood-mitigation funding?

For one thing, most of the San Jacinto watershed lies outside of Harris County. And some commissioners have flat out rejected spending money to build projects outside the county even though the 2018 flood bond permitted it.

Protecting areas like Humble, Atascocita and Kingwood will most likely require building upstream projects outside the county. Until the political winds change, funding for such projects will most likely have to come from the state or federal government.

Posted by Bob Rehak on April 22, 2024

2428 Days since Hurricane Harvey

GLO Reviewing HUD Applications for Harris County Projects Totaling Half Billion Dollars

The Texas General Land Office (GLO) is currently conducting a final review on more than $498 million in grant applications from Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) and Harris County Community Services Department (CSD). That’s out of a total allocation of $1,072,033,863 allocated to Harris County. And that means projects for almost half the Harvey money allocated to Harris County will soon go to Washington for a final review by HUD.

Additional applications for the rest of the money will soon follow the projects listed below. They will be submitted “on a rolling basis,” according to Brittany Eck, a GLO spokesperson.

The GLO administers all HUD funds in the state of Texas.

GLO Working Side by Side with Harris County

GLO has a “Strike Team” embedded at HCFCD headquarters, working side by side with both CSD and HCFCD to eliminate any delays on the HUD applications. The billion dollars allocated to the county falls into several different programs, each with different deadlines and complex rules.

“We are currently in the ‘Eligibility Phase,’ which is the most critical, but also the most time consuming. During this phase we must ensure that the projects proposed sync with HUD regulations in terms of LMI beneficiaries, environmental impacts and more,” said Eck. 

No Performance Benchmarks Missed So Far

“It is important to note that Harris County has not missed a performance benchmark yet on the HUD applications. The GLO is working with Harris County to ensure all administrative paperwork is completed in accordance with federal regulations. This protects both Harris County and the State of Texas from incurring costly ‘findings’ during the post-project audit process.”

A finding during a post-project audit could potentially cause HUD to claw back part of its grant money. So it’s vitally important to ensure all regulations are followed to the letter.

Three Main Batches of Money

The three main pots of money include:

  • Harris County CSD – $208,152,174 in CDBG-MIT funds
  • HCFCD – $322,033,863 in CDBG-DR funds
  • HCFCD – $541,847,826 in CDBG-MIT funds

That brings the total of original allocations to $1,072,033,863.

Since this involves the government, it also includes acronyms. So let me explain some of the terms.

CDBG stands for Community Development Block Grants. These grants provide communities with resources to address a wide range of development needs, providing projects meet one or more of HUD’s three defined national objectives. Namely, a CDBG project must:

  • Benefit to low- and moderate- income (LMI) persons
  • Aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight and/or
  • Meet an urgent need (UN), especially one impacting public health and safety.

But what about the rest of those acronyms?

  • DR stands for Disaster Relief
  • MIT stands for Mitigation.

What’s the difference? According to HUD, CDBG-DR grants provide housing, infrastructure, and economic revitalization assistance to impacted areas. The CDBG-Mitigation (CDBG-MIT) program provides additional funding to lessen the impact of future disasters.

To learn more about HUD applications for the specific Harris County projects, see below.

Harris County CDBG-MIT

Harris County Community Services Department was allocated $208,152,174 in CDBG-MIT funds for infrastructure, planning, and project delivery.

The contract was executed on 08/31/2022. All projects in this batch of funding must close out by 8/31/27.

The $208 million breaks down into three subcategories.

  • Infrastructure programs – $154 million
  • Planning programs – $37.5 million
  • Project delivery – $16.7 million
Infrastructure Programs

Of 11 projects initially proposed in this category, the three largest in terms of dollar amounts – totaling $75M of the $154M – have been submitted for preliminary review.

$37,500,000.00Pine Trails Subdivision Drainage Improvements
Involves upgrading approximately 63,650 LF of drainage systems and developing two (2) detention ponds in Harris County Precinct No. 2. 
66.97% LMI
$20,545,326.00Ralston Acres Subdivision Drainage Improvements
Involves upgrading approximately 15,250 LF of drainage systems and developing two (2) detention ponds in Harris County Precinct No. 1 and Ralston Acres Subdivision.  
Income Surveys TBD
$16,954,674.00 North Forest Subdivision Drainage Improvements
Involves upgrading approximately 19,700 LF of drainage systems and developing one (1) detention pond in Harris County Precinct No. 1 and the North Forest Subdivision.  
Income Surveys TBD
As of 3/19/24

Planning Programs 

Four projects – costing a total of $16.5M out of the $37.5 million – have been submitted for preliminary review out of the 23 proposed planning projects.

$500,000.00 Harris County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
The Harris County Office of Homeland Security & Emergency Management is seeking to update the Harris County Hazard Mitigation Plan. The plan will develop strategies and action items to minimize vulnerabilities and damages and include 37 participating jurisdictions.
$12,500,000.00Drainage Master Plan for Unincorporated Harris County
The planning project will evaluate drainage infrastructure capacity status and deficiencies in Harris County’s unincorporated areas. It will also guide the identification and implementation of mitigation alternatives to reduce flood risk.
$500,000.00Halls Bayou Watershed Flood Risk Analysis Study
The scope of the Halls Bayou watershed study is to analyze the best available data incorporating the Halls Bayou watershed flood risk reduction-related project and to evaluate existing program benefits using the new Atlas 14 precipitation data to identify additional potential flood reduction needs within the watershed.
$3,000,000.00The Evacuation Routes Study
The Evacuation Routes Study aims to enhance transportation resilience in road-flooding-prone areas of Unincorporated Harris County.
As of 3/19/24

Project Delivery: 

$16,652,174 of the $208,152,174 County allocation will be used to administer the funds for projects.

HCFCD Disaster Relief

HCFCD was allocated $322,033,863 in CDBG-DR funds for infrastructure projects.

HCFCD submitted 13 projects costing a total of $317,494,724.78 for CDBG-DR grants and is putting up local funds in the amount of $45,899,821 for those same projects. All of the applications have been officially submitted and are being reviewed for HUD eligibility completeness by the GLO.

The HCFCD/CDBG-DR contract was executed on 11/27/2023 and must be closed out by 3/31/2026. The 13 projects include:

$20,361,143.56Arbor Oaks Stormwater Detention Basin
To construct one 431-acre-feet stormwater detention basin within the White Oak Bayou watershed. 
60.55% LMI
$20,247,760.00Isom Stormwater Detention Basin
To construct one 550-acre-feet regional stormwater detention basin within Halls Bayou. 
74.23% LMI
$8,692,644.00Lauder Stormwater Detention Basin
To construct one 341.47-acre-feet stormwater detention basin within Greens Bayou. 
78.10% LMI
$20,361,143.56Brookglen Stormwater Detention Basin
To construct one 33.45 acre-feet stormwater detention basin within Armand Bayou Watershed. 
52.54% LMI
$25,390,047.00Kluge Stormwater Detention Basin – Phase 3
To construct one 350 acre-feet stormwater detention basin within Little Cypress Creek watershed. 
14.25% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$77,899,107.00Greens Bayou Mid-Reach Channel Conveyance Improvements
To rehabilitate 19,008 LF of channel conveyance along Greens Bayou. 
78.61% LMI
$18,878,499.00Cypress Creek Channel Rehabilitation, Main Stem, Batch 5
To rehabilitate 7,500 LF of channel conveyance along Cypress Creek. 
49.18% LMI, but qualifies under Urgent Need
$36,710,019.00Dinner Creek Stormwater Detention Basin ‐ Phase 1
To construct two (2) detention basins, northwest and southeast of Dinner Creek. 
52.36% LMI
$7,642,742.00Barker Reservoir Channel Rehabilitation, Repair Package 2
To rehabilitate 18,528 LF of channel conveyance at 19 different sites along Barker Reservoir. 
21.64% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$9,742,750.00Stormwater Detention Basin along Jackson Bayou
To rehabilitate 2,025 LF of channel conveyance and construct one (1) 15 acre-feet stormwater detention basin within Jackson Bayou. 
60.78% LMI
$23,496,000.00Addicks Reservoir Channel Rehabilitation & Restoration, Repair Package 3
To rehabilitate 49,296 LF of channel conveyance at 49 sites along the Addicks Reservoir. 
37.04% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$23,844,000.00East TC Jester Detention Basin – Compartment 1B
To construct one 725 acre-feet stormwater detention basin within the Cypress Creek watershed. 
36.14% but qualifies under Urgent Need
$12,293,732.00Keegans Bayou Stormwater Detention Basin Near Old Richmond Road – Phase 1
To construct one stormwater detention basin within the Brays Bayou watershed. 
56.71% LMI
As of 3/19/24

HCFCD CDBG-MIT

Harris County Flood Control District was allocated $541,847,826.00 in CDBG-MIT funds for infrastructure hazard mitigation projects.

Five projects – totaling $73 million – have been submitted for preliminary HUD eligibility completeness review out of the 19 mitigation projects originally proposed.

Overall Contract Status: Contract executed 11/07/2023

Projected Closeout: March 31, 2028

$3,235,715.00Halls Bayou Channel Conveyance Improvements Downstream of Hopper (HALLS HOPPER)
Includes widening approximately 4,525 LF of the existing channel along the left (east) bank from downstream of Hopper Road to just upstream of Pinewood Village Park. 
70.03% LMI
$10,427,946.00Hahl North Stormwater Detention Basin (Hahl North)
Includes construction of one 220 acres-feet of stormwater detention basin adjacent to Halls Bayou and the widening of approximately 2,100 LF of the existing channel along Halls Bayou. 
73.65% LMI
$17,300,036.00West TC Jester Stormwater Detention Basin
Will create one 414 acre-feet stormwater detention basin in the Cypress Creek watershed. 
36.13% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$11,987,888.00Taylor Gully Channel Conveyance Improvements
Includes approximately 13,118 LF of stormwater drainage channel improvements in the affected stretch of channel.
20.92% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
$30,007,445.00Boudreaux Stormwater Detention Basin – Phase 1
Will build one 458 acre-feet stormwater detention basin west of Holderrieth Road along Willow Creek. 
33.59% LMI but qualifies under Urgent Need
Altogether, the HUD applications must benefit at least 50% LMI individuals according to HUD regulations governing these funds.
Taylor Gully Looking S from county line
Taylor Gully looking S from the Montgomery County Line. Up to 600 homes flooded twice here in 2019, after Perry Homes clearcut 270 acres without installing the required detention basin capacity. One of the HUD applications seeks to improve the channel.

Even though some projects drop below the 50% threshold, as a group they meet the requirement. Those that fall below the threshold also qualify under HUD’s Urgent Need mandate.

Extensions Requested, But Not Yet Confirmed

GLO has requested extensions for all these projects. While HUD reportedly seems favorable, written confirmation has not yet been received. That places a premium on HUD applications that can be executed quickly.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/19/24 based on information provided by the Texas GLO

2394 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Trammell Crow Contractors Expanding Stormwater Detention Basin

After a wet winter that saw sediment carried offsite by stormwater on multiple occasions, contractors are finally installing stormwater drainage on Phase II of the troubled Trammell Crow apartment complex on West Lake Houston Parkway and Kings Park Way.

Aerial photos taken on 03/18/24 show order gradually emerging out of apparent chaos on a construction site piled high with mountains of dirt and pockmarked with giant holes, even as contractors lay drain pipe, pour concrete and begin expanding the Phase I Stormwater Detention Basin. See below.

Looking S at Phase II of Trammell Crow’s High Street Residential Apartment Complex on West Lake Houston Parkway.

In the photo above note now the excavator is shaving down the bank of the Trammell Crow Phase I detention basin (foreground).

Expansion of Detention Basin

Plans show that both phases of the 11-foot deep, apartment-complex detention basin will comprise 36.99 acre feet. They also show that the total size of the development is approximately 32.4 acres. That exceeds the minimum requirement of .65 acre feet of detention per acre required by Harris County Flood Control.

Note extension of detention basin past dotted line and how it corresponds to excavation in photo above. Phase I on left, Phase II on right.

Elsewhere on the Trammell Crow site, contractors are busy installing drainage.

The corner that flooded so badly last January and February, leading to citations from Harris County Engineering.

After the run-in with Harris County Engineering, the developer was later caught pumping silty stormwater into the street on a Sunday, when inspectors would likely be off work.

Regardless, there have been no floods since, giving contractors time to move forward.

Father north, contractors are busy prepping and pouring foundations for the apartments.
Freshly poured concrete. Notice men smoothing and compacting it.

At this time, long-range weather forecasts show no major storm fronts for the remainder of the month. That may give Trammell Crow contractors a window to avert more disastrous drainage delays.

Stormwater is the enemy of construction. That’s why most contractors plan for it upfront, rather than trying to deal with it after the fact.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/18/24

2393 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.

Preliminary Recommendations for Kingwood Diversion Ditch Announced

On 3/6/24, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) revealed its preliminary recommendations for the Kingwood Diversion Ditch. The recommendations come out of a preliminary engineering report (PER) for the project. And HCFCD is still soliciting public comments.

Recommendations from Preliminary Engineering Report

HCFCD initially considered three alternative scenarios and dismissed one. It then spent most of last night’s meeting comparing the other two and discussing why it preferred one.

The proposed project alternative recommends:

  • Channel conveyance improvements to the Diversion Ditch
  • A diversion structure at the intersection of the Diversion Ditch and Bens Branch to take enough water out of Bens Branch to bring it up from a 2-year level of service to a 100-year level.
  • Bridge replacements at Kingwood Drive, Walnut Lane, Deer Ridge Estates Boulevard and the pedestrian bridge at Lake Village Drive
  • A new outfall to the West Fork San Jacinto River.

The bridges at Northpark Drive will also be rebuilt, but as part of the Northpark Expansion Project.

The ultimate goal of the Kingwood Diversion Ditch Project is to reduce the risk of structural flooding associated with the Bens Branch channel.

HCFCD

Improvements to One Channel Improve Another

The Kingwood Diversion Ditch is a man-made channel that was constructed prior to 1978. The channel diverted excess stormwater from Bens Branch and gave it an alternate route to the West Fork of the San Jacinto River.

The two channels largely operate as one unit. But HCFCD has room to expand the ditch and not Bens Branch. That’s because large portions of the Bens Branch Channel remain natural and are flanked by greenbelt trails, near and dear to the hearts of residents.

The Kingwood Diversion Ditch, however, has ample right of way and room for expansion. Even though, the Diversion Ditch operates at 100% of its design capacity, expansion of the Diversion Ditch can reduce the water surface elevation along Bens Branch without destroying the natural character of the stream.

The two alternatives that made the initial cut each recommended widening and deepening the Diversion Ditch channel. Exact dimensions/increases, however, will not become clear until final construction plans are developed.

Proposed widths for the bottom of the channel could vary from 10-80 feet. Top of channel widths could vary from 150-190 feet.

HCFCD said only that widths would vary along different portions of the channel and that, altogether both channels should be able to handle 100-year rains when the project is complete. The Kingwood Area Drainage Analysis revealed that portions of Ben’s Branch flooded in a 2-year rain.

The screen capture below shows benefits of the recommended alternative (#3).

HCFCD recommended Alternative #3 because of savings on maintenance.

Money Not Yet Identified to Fund Improvements

However, money does not currently exist to fund ANY of the three options. Almost seven years after Harvey, only $3.9 million has been committed. But costs are estimated at $54.5 million.

Screen capture from PER review meeting.

HCFCD emphasized that it always looks for funding. The District laid out a sequence of future events. Next steps:

  • Present the preliminary engineering report to commissioners court in two weeks.
  • Commission final design
  • Additional community engagement meeting
  • Secure funding
  • Begin construction

Need for Local Disaster-Mitigation Funding

The funding challenges, almost seven years after Harvey when the sense of urgency has dissipated, underscore the need for communities everywhere to plan for their own flood mitigation.

We can’t expect the federal government to ride to the rescue for every issue in every community. People in Kentucky don’t want to pay for our Diversion Ditch any more than people in Kingwood want to pay for a Diversion Ditch in Kentucky.

Still Time for Public Comment

You can see video of the meeting and the full presentation here. HCFCD will accept public comments through March 20:

  • At hcfcd.org/F-14, or
  • Via phone at 855-925-2801 with Meeting Code: 6701

Northpark Phase II Meeting Tonight

Switching gears, the Lake Houston Redevelopment Authority will hold a separate meeting tonight at the Kingwood Community Center from 5-7PM to discuss plans for the second phase of Northpark Drive Expansion. Hope to see you there.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 3/7/2024

2382 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Diversion Ditch Meeting Tonight; Northpark Phase II Tomorrow

Tonight, Harris County Flood Control (HCFCD) will discuss the results of a preliminary engineering review on the Kingwood Diversion Ditch at a virtual meeting from 6:30 to 7:30. The objective: to find the optimal alternative for:

  • Returning the Diversion Ditch to a hundred-year level of service
  • Pushing back the floodplain from homes and businesses
  • Reducing future maintenance costs
  • Controlling overall costs
  • Significant reduction in water surface elevation along Bens Branch and the Diversion Ditch.

For those of you who may not be familiar with ditch names, The Kingwood Diversion Ditch splits off Ben’s Branch just south of the new St. Martha’s Catholic Church, about a block north of the fireworks stand on Northpark (see below).

Where water gets diverted from Bens Branch (running diagonally through center of frame) in tree line. Diversion ditch center then goes under Northpark Drive, foreground, on its way to River Grove Park.

It then cuts south toward Kingwood Drive next to the HPD Fire Station, and then continues its way to the West Fork snaking its way through Trailwood Village and past Deer Ridge Park. It then joins the San Jacinto at River Grove Park.

White = Diversion Ditch. Red = Bens Branch. Green = Possible new outfall.

The Diversion Ditch got its name because it diverts water from Bens Branch (red above), which cuts diagonally through the heart of Kingwood. It therefore reduces flooding in all neighborhoods south and west of the red line.

That’s one reason why the Kingwood Area Drainage Analysis named it the most important drainage project in Kingwood. It affects more people than any other project in the entire area.

Features of Various Options

Features of the various options presented tonight will include:

  • Expanding conveyance of the Diversion Ditch
  • Adding a drop structure to reduce erosion
  • Creating a new outfall to the West Fork
  • New, wider bridges over the Diversion Ditch
  • Improved street drainage
  • Creating a natural stable channel design in certain areas with riffles and pools.

This is your opportunity to provide community input on the recommendations before final design begins.

How/When to Join Meeting

The Virtual Community Engagement Meeting will be held on:

March 6, 2024

6:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.

Join online at: www.publicinput.com/Kingwood2

Or by phone* at 855-925-2801 with Meeting Code: 6701

Organization of Meeting

The meeting will begin with a brief presentation to share project updates, followed by a moderated Q&A session with Flood Control District team members.

How to Submit Public Comments

Residents will be able to submit questions, comments and input before, during and after the meeting, which will be considered during project development. Any comments not addressed during the Q&A session will receive a response at the conclusion of the public comment period.

You may submit comments in any one of three ways from March 6, 2024 (tonight) to March 20, 2024.

Any questions not addressed during tonight’s Q&A will receive a response from the Flood Control District after the event. Meeting information and video will be available on:

This is in Addition to the Northpark Phase II Meeting

This is not the only flood-related meeting this week. So don’t get confused. There’s another one tomorrow night, March 7 from 5-7 in-person at the Kingwood Community Center to discuss Northpark Phase II. That one will be sponsored by TxDOT, LHRA, TIRZ-10, and CoH. Please join your neighbors for both meetings.

Posted by Bob Rehak on March 6, 2024

2381 Days since Hurricane Harvey

HCFCD Flood-Mitigation Spending Down for Third Straight Year

Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) flood-mitigation spending finished down for the third year in a row last year. Spending for all four quarters totaled $243.1 million, a little more than half of its peak in 2020.

Spending for 2023 was 56% of its 20-year peak in 2020 at $433 million. Here are the exact amounts spent by HCFCD year by year since 2000.

Possible Reasons for Slowdown

HCFCD flood-mitigation spending increased each quarter last year, but the total wasn’t enough to prevent another annual decline.

HCFCD watchers have conjectured about possible reasons for the slowdown. They include:

Bond Fully Funded, But Inflation Taking Toll

Despite the slowdown, there was some very good news last year. During 2023, thanks to those HUD funds, the 2018 flood bond became fully funded.

The original bond contained approximately $5 billion in projects. But voters approved only $2.5 billion. The ambitious project list associated with the bond contained a bet that HCFCD could raise as much money from partners as it did from voters. And last year, the District did just that. Partner commitments now exceed another $2.5 billion.

Now, HCFCD must spend the money before inflation steals it away. Inflation has already reduced the purchasing power of bond funds by 15-20% in the last four years. Twenty percent of a $5 billion, is another billion that the grant writers must raise just to stay even.

Where is Money Going? Will There Be Enough to Finish All Projects?

That raises two questions, “Where is the money going?” It certainly isn’t going proportionally to all watersheds or precincts.

The four graphs and tables below show where the flood-bond money and partner money has gone since Harvey and during the last quarter.

County-wide projects include such things as planning, MAAPnext, subdivision drainage projects and preliminary planning for flood tunnels (see Z-level projects at end of list).

Q3 2017 through end of 2023.

Note that “Since Harvey” includes a year’s worth of spending not in the flood bond. Voters passed the bond on the first anniversary of Harvey. The District spent $172 million during that year. So the actual amount of bond/partner funds spent to date should total a bit over $1.8 billion.

Q4 2023 Spending Shows Shifts in Some Spending Priorities

Compare those figures with the last quarter of 2023 to see how priorities have or haven’t changed.

By comparing this bar chart with the one immediately above, we can see that relative spending in the San Jacinto watershed has remained consistent if dismal. The county’s largest watershed ranked 14th since Harvey and 13th last quarter.

Other noteworthy observations:

Brays Bayou spending dropped to fourth place from its perennial spot atop the pyramid. Most projects in Project Brays are now completed.

Willow Creek dropped from eighth place to last.

Sims Bayou jumped from 12th place to 6th.

Spending in the Little Cypress Creek watershed jumped to first place from fifth…even outpacing county-wide spending. That may be related to engineering for several large land purchases made earlier in the bond for the Harris County Frontier Program. The Frontier Program buys land in optimal locations in developing watersheds for flood-mitigation projects, such as detention basins. Then it leases capacity back to developers.

Fourteen watersheds received less than a million dollars in spending last quarter.

Based on data obtained via FOIA Request

And four watersheds of Harris County’s 23 watersheds received less than $100,000 last quarter.

The difference in spending between the high and low watersheds last quarter was more than 500 to 1!

I need more time to dig into these numbers. Look for additional analysis in the days to come.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/22/2024

2337 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.

Woodridge Village Plans Still on Hold, But that Could Change Soon

Back in November 2023, Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) terminated its excavation and removal contract with Sprint Sand and Clay. The 2021 contract called for Sprint to remove up to 500,000 cubic yards of material from Woodridge Village. Had the full amount been excavated, it would have more than doubled the stormwater detention basin capacity on the site.

Extent of excavation at end of Woodridge Village E&R Contract with Sprint. Photo: 12/28/21.

Only About A Third of Max Volume Excavated

But at the time HCFCD terminated the contract, Sprint had excavated only 160,748 cubic yards, an amount equal to 100 acre feet, and only about a third of the maximum allowed under the contract.

When HCFCD purchased the Woodridge Village property from Perry Homes, the site had only 70% of Atlas 14 requirements (the new standard for a 100-year storm). The lack of detention capacity contributed to the flooding of hundreds of homes in Kingwood along Taylor Gully twice in 2019.

In the end, the 160,748 cubic yards meant that the site had 96% of Atlas 14 requirements. But significantly, the additional capacity is still just a hole in the ground. It has not yet been tied into other Woodridge detention basins or drainage channels.

Termination Caused by HUD Rule

The rationale for termination of the contract had nothing to do with Sprint’s performance. Rather, it had to do with an unintended consequence of a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rule.

HCFCD hoped to pay for both Taylor Gully and Woodridge Village with HUD funds. But a HUD rule states that HUD funds cannot pay for work already completed on a project when a grant application is submitted.

As a result, when HCFCD applies for a HUD grant, it must:

  • Zero out work completed to date and stop work.
  • Estimate the cost of remaining work.
  • Wait for an award determination.

The rule also affected several other E&R projects in Harris County, such as one on TC Jester next to Cypress Creek.

It’s especially painful in this case because HCFCD listed the Woodridge Village stormwater detention basin as an alternate project for HUD funding. That means, it would only be considered if a fatal flaw knocked one of HCFCD’s primary recommendations out of the running.

HCFCD Exploring Alternative

Amy Crouser, an HCFCD spokesperson said, “Woodridge must be treated as if it were funded by HUD and GLO, which means that we cannot perform any choice-limiting actions on the site, such as the E&R contract. It will be some time before we know if any alternate projects will move to the ‘funded list.’”  

Crouser then added, “However, we are investigating whether we can split the Woodridge Village Stormwater Detention Basin into two projects. That may offer some flexibility in getting the E&R contract reinstated. We should have an answer in the next few weeks.”

HCFCD has not yet publicly released the final engineering studies on Woodridge or Taylor Gully.

With interest rates falling, housing starts may pick up and increase demand for fill dirt. That could eliminate the only real drawback of an E&R contract; they can be time consuming if demand for dirt is low. Otherwise, they represent exceptional value for taxpayers. Sprint made only $1,000 from the contract but made its money back by selling the dirt at market rates.

Status of Excavation At Year End

Here’s where things stood at the end of 2023:

Acre Feet of Stormwater Detention% of Atlas-14 Requirement% of Ultimate
Site Had When Purchased from Perry Homes27170%47%
Had as of 12/31/2337196%63.9%
Atlas 14 Requires385100%66%
Had Sprint Excavated All 500,000 CY580150%100%
As of 12/31/23, nothing but the cool winter wind could be heard howling through Woodridge Village.

Stay tuned for more news as it develops.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/3/2023

2318 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Construction Beginning Soon on Mercer Stormwater Detention Basin

Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) will soon start building the new Mercer Stormwater Detention Basin, a large flood-risk reduction project along Cypress Creek adjacent to Mercer Botanical Gardens. HCFCD issued a notice to proceed to the contractor in December 2023 and the contractor is now mobilizing. 

The basin is north of FM-1960, east of the Hardy Toll Road, south of Cypress Creek and west of the Memorial Hills.

Combined 512 Acre Feet in Two Basins

The Mercer Stormwater Detention Basin project will include the excavation of 512 acre-feet of soil and other materials from the site. Once complete, the $14.8 million dry-bottom stormwater detention basin will provide approximately 166.8 million gallons of stormwater storage during heavy rainfall events.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program provided a $15.4 million grant for the project. Another $9.7 million comes from the 2018 Bond Program.

Arrowstone Contracting, LLC received a $14,846,391 contract for construction. Land acquisition, engineering and administration will consume the rest of the budget.

The stormwater detention basin will include two separate compartments, north and south, with an equalizer pipe connecting them. An 54″ outfall pipe will also be constructed along the north compartment so stormwater can slowly flow back into Cypress Creek after storms pass.

Construction Caution

Contractors will access the work area via FM-1960 or Lazy Ravine Lane in the Memorial Hills Subdivision. The contractor may use heavy construction equipment such as dump trucks, excavators and bulldozers. Motorists should be aware of truck traffic when passing near construction access points and along truck routes.

The HUD Grant stipulates that construction needs to finish by Fall 2024. And construction is scheduled to take 348 days.

Reducing Backwater in Tributaries

This is among multiple stormwater detention basin projects the Flood Control District is developing in the Cypress Creek watershed.

A regional drainage study for the watershed found that flooding along tributaries of Cypress Creek is predominately caused by rising stormwater in Cypress Creek backing up into tributaries. Flooding is not caused by a lack of sufficient stormwater conveyance or drainage capacity on the tributaries themselves. Therefore, stormwater detention basins could be a beneficial project to reduce that backwater issue.

Project Benefits

The Mercer Basins will remove the 100-year area of inundation from 30 structures and the 500-year area of inundation from an additional 17 structures.

The project also includes a 30’ wide berm to accommodate maintenance and future recreational amenities.

The project avoids wetlands and will lower the water surface elevation by .35 feet during a 100-year storm event, according to HCFCD.

Upstream detention was one of three major prongs of the strategy to reduce flooding in the Lake Houston Area. This and every other little bit will help downstream.

The regional drainage study found here recommends nearly 25,000 acre-feet of additional stormwater detention in the Cypress Creek watershed. That would be enough to hold back the peak flow during Harvey for almost 5 hours. In lesser storms, the benefit would last even longer.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/2/24 based on information from HCFCD

2317 Days since Hurricane Harvey

HCFCD Grappling with Inflation’s Impact on Flood-Bond Purchasing Power

Inflation has reduced the 2018 Flood Bond’s purchasing power. The general rate of inflation during the last five years adds up to 20%. That could potentially eliminate one fifth of the projects in the flood bond.

It’s a serious concern for the people whose mitigation projects have been put at the end of the line by the County’s Equity Prioritization Framework. Some residents may never see any benefit from their tax dollars, which are going to other areas.

Here’s how Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) will look at projects that now have an uncertain future.

Local Costs Consistent with General Rate of Inflation

In a presentation to the Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force, Jesal Shah PE, the new Chief Project Delivery Officer for HCFCD, discussed the issue of inflation. Shah, a Houston native, has been in his job since May, 2023. He previously led flood-risk reduction planning, design, engineering, and construction efforts for the government of British Columbia.

Shah cited 15-20% increases in construction, material, and right-of-way acquisition costs for Harris County flood-mitigation projects.

This and other screen captures below are from Shah’s presentation to Flood Task Force on 12/14/23.

Summary of 2018 Flood-Bond Funding To Date

The 2018 flood bond contained $2.5 billion in funding for approximately $5 billion worth of projects. Partnership funding, i.e., grants, were supposed to make up the difference.

And at this point, all of the partnership funding has been secured thanks to an infusion of $825 million in Community Development Block Grant funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Texas General Land Office (GLO).

“Anticipated” should now be removed from this slide.

That’s very good news.

63% of Bonds Sold Already

Shah says that the County has sold $1.575 billion worth of bonds to date, almost two thirds of the original $2.5 billion.

Of the two thirds, about half the money has been spent or “encumbered.” Encumbered means the money is committed to projects and difficult to move. For instance, a project may be in construction, but not yet completed.

The other half has been committed to projects, but not yet encumbered. For instance, bonds may have been sold, but the construction job may not have been awarded yet.

See below.

Securing the partner funding is huge good news. But the impact of inflation is worrisome. To help deal with that, the County is re-evaluating all projects associated with the flood bond.

How Projects are Being Re-evaluated

Shah cited three types of projects listed in the original bond. Those with:

  • Well defined scope and accurate estimates.
  • Clear scope but inaccurate estimates. For instance, the Lauder basin has almost tripled its original cost estimate.
  • Vague scope and unreliable estimates.

See examples below.

To complicate matters, some backstop funding from the Flood Resilience Trust is no longer available because of new “guidance” from Commissioners Court. That will eliminate $343 million in funding flexibility.

And keep this in mind. The bond program is far from complete. We could easily see another 15-20% of inflation before its over. So what to do?

Sharpening the Pencil

Shah’s team is dividing the remaining bond projects into two piles.

  • Those with clear scope and funding will be completed.
  • Those without clear scope or funding will be re-evaluated.

Shah hopes to present an updated project list to Commissioners Court sometime during the second quarter of 2024.

Shah has already taken a first pass at re-evaluating the bond’s project list. Of the 181 projects identified in the bond:

  • 30 have already been completed or eliminated.
  • 63 will continue moving forward.
  • 88 (almost half) will need more funding or more clarity (i.e., more engineering studies/tighter estimates) to move forward.

The slide below shows the guiding principles for evaluating the 88 projects that need more funding or clarity.

Lack of Balance Could Jeopardize Future Bond Offerings

One possible way to mitigate the toll of inflation involves phasing projects in areas that have already received large amounts of funding so that projects in areas that received little funding could move forward.

For instance, in a project that involves multiple stormwater detention basins, one or more of the basins could be delayed until the next bond. Meanwhile, delaying that basin could free up money for a basin in a different watershed.

However, during Q&A, Shah said he has no plans to phase projects.

A lack of equitable distribution could jeopardize future bond offerings.

And many areas have received little funding from this bond.

More than a 100 to 1 difference exists between projects on the left and right.

In the future, voters who saw no benefit from the 2018 flood bond might, once again, feel victimized by bait-and-switch tactics.

Selling future bonds will require restoring faith in the fairness of government. And that will require spreading bond funds around so that everyone – in all parts of the county – sees some benefit from them. That’s my humble opinion.

When HCFCD presents its updated project list to Commissioners Court in the second quarter of 2024, it will be interesting to see whether Commissioners and the County Judge agree with it.

John Whitmire’s landslide election in the Houston Mayor’s race may send a message to them. Whitmire is a Democrat who campaigned across the aisle and received heavy Republican support.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 12/16/2023

2300 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Tree Lane Bridge over Bens Branch Still Standing

The recent drought has reduced the rate of erosion under the Tree Lane/Bens Branch Bridge for now. But with wetter weather expected, we need to accelerate the repair effort. Recent pictures show the desperate need for repairs to the bridge. It’s next to Bear Branch Elementary School where more than 600 students attend grades K-5.

Power of Moving Water

The current state of this bridge and the area around it is a testament to the power of moving water … more than engineers designed the bridge to handle.

Water jetting under the bridge during storms has ripped away great slabs of concrete, eroded side walls, and partially blocked a storm drain outfall.

Condition of Tree Lane Bridge over Bens Branch on 11/24/23

It has also eroded the channel. Rip rap has done little to halt the erosion.

11/24/23. Condition of Tree Lane Bridge over Bens Branch.

Downcutting has exposed utility lines. And stormwater has carried chunks of concrete downstream like toothpicks.

11/24/23. Bens Branch downstream of Tree Lane Bridge.

Before Hurricane Harvey, the tree canopy in this area was so dense, one could barely see Bens Branch from the air. Now, there’s a gaping hole in the landscape caused by the “jetting.”

11/24/23. Downstream erosion of greenbelt caused by jetting water from under bridge.

As more and more water builds up behind the bridge during storms, it causes water to shoot under the bridge with greater pressure and accelerate erosion.

One can’t help but wonder whether the random and cumulative impact of several large storms caused this damage. Whether insufficiently mitigated upstream development helped nature along. Or whether the bridge simply reached the end of its normal life.

The City of Houston attempted to repair this bridge in March 2020. By January of 2023, it was worse than ever. And in June of 2023, I wrote about damage accelerating.

But a prolonged, intense drought last summer put an end to the acceleration. A close comparison of recent photos with those taken six months ago shows that the bridge now looks much like it did last June.

When Will Bridge Be Fixed?

I have learned that both the City of Houston and Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) are studying the bridge. In August, the City even allocated money to fix it. However, HCFCD worried about the impact to its Bens Branch channel. The two entities are now trying to reach a mutually agreeable solution.

Having lived near here for 40 years, one thing is clear to me. We can’t count on drought to prevent more erosion forever.

During El Niño years (like now), much of Texas is cooler and wetter than average. Northern storms generally track farther south, producing more clouds, rain and severe weather, according to the NWS.  

Perhaps we’ll get some good news on Tree Lane bridge repairs or replacement by Christmas. I’ll let you know when we get the engineering report.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/28/23

2282 Days since Hurricane Harvey