Tag Archive for: sand traps

SJRA Update on Status of Four Flood-Mitigation Projects

1/11/2026 – At the end of 2025, the San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) issued an update on the status of four flood-mitigation projects. During Hurricane Harvey and again in May 2024, SJRA came under withering criticism for releases from Lake Conroe exceeding 70,000 cubic feet per second that flooded downstream residents.

The four projects represent different ways to offset similar releases in the future and their adverse effects. They include:

Joint-Reservoir-Operations Study

The City of Houston is currently performing a project to add new spillway gates to increase the controlled release capacity of the Lake Houston dam. The goal of this Joint Reservoir Operations Study is to determine the most efficient and safe operation of Lake Conroe in series with Lake Houston once the new gates are installed.

The study will evaluate the feasibility of prereleases including impacts on water supply. The study will also develop a forecasting tool for Lake Houston and support development of the gate operations policy for the proposed Lake Houston dam gates.

Black & Veatch is handling the million-dollar study for SJRA, City of Houston, City of Humble and the Texas Water Development Board. The engineering company received a notice to proceed in August 2025 and expects to complete the project by December 2027.

Black & Veatch is also handling the engineering for the City of Houston on the project to add more flood gates to the Lake Houston Dam. The company has completed preliminary engineering. Mayor Whitmire expects them to finish detailed engineering by the end of this year.

For more on the Joint Reservoir Operations Study, see:

Flood Infrastructure Fund (FIF) Abridged Application
FIF Final Application
Joint Ops Project Benefit Area Map

Spring Creek Flood Control Dams Feasibility Study

This project explored multiple alternative sites for dams along Spring Creek with the potential to reduce flooding. The two most cost effective alternatives were on Birch and Walnut Creeks. SJRA released its draft report to the Texas Water Development Board in June 2025. Its final report is due next month.

For more on the Spring Creek Dams Site Study, see:

FIF Abridged Application
FIF Final Application
Spring Creek Project Benefit Area Map
www.SpringCreekStudy.com

Upper San Jacinto River Basin Regional Sedimentation Study

According to the Army Corps, conveyance of the San Jacinto West Fork between Humble and Kingwood was reduced 90% due to sedimentation. That exacerbated flooding. Since then, SJRA has evaluated sedimentation throughout the river basin to learn:

  • Where the most sediment comes from
  • How to prioritize watersheds for improvements
  • Conceptual solutions

The goal: reduce loss of floodway conveyance in the basin.

SJRA started the project in May 2022. It hopes to deliver a draft report to the TWDB by October 2026 and the final report by June 2027.

For more information, see:

sanjacintosedimentationstudy.com
FIF Abridged Application
FIF Final Application
Sedimentation Study Project Benefit Area Map

Sand-Trap Project

The sand trap project is one potential way to remove material from the river in order to improve conveyance and reduce the risk of flooding.

SJRA is working with HCFCD and City of Houston to plan, design, and construct one or more “sand traps” along the West Fork.

 A major component of the project is coordinating with Aggregate Production Operations (APOs) along the river. A public/private partnership would provide for operation and maintenance of the proposed sand trap(s). A conceptual design effort to select the most feasible site(s) for installation of sand trap(s) has been completed, and preliminary design is scheduled for completion in early 2026.

For more information, see:

Sand Trap Conceptual Design Report Comments Received
Sand Trap Summary Document for Stakeholders (11-08-22)
SJR and Tributaries Sediment Removal and Sand Trap Development Conceptual Design Report
Sediment Trap Pilot Project Preliminary Design Scope

The Studies are Only Step One

It’s important to recognize that more than eight years after Harvey, not one of these studies is complete yet. And the studies are just the first step in a multi-step process that includes final engineering, funding, land acquisition, and construction for most of these.

At this rate, it could take decades before we see actual flood-mitigation benefits. We really need to find ways to speed up this process.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/11/26

3057 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Update on Floodgates, Dredging, Sand Traps from Martin, Costello

At Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin’s final town hall meeting last night, he and Chief Recovery Officer Stephen Costello gave an update on the status of new, higher capacity floodgates for the Lake Houston Dam. Their talks also addressed dredging and sand traps.

City of Houston Chief Recovery Office Stephen Costello (l) and Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin at Martin’s final town hall meeting on 10/17/2023. Term limits bar Martin from running again for Council, though he is running for City Controller.

According to the latest estimate, construction of the gates now looks like it could begin in mid-2026, barring unforeseen setbacks.

The City has scheduled more dredging for the San Jacinto West Fork south of where the mouth bar used to be. Also, Costello says the City has completed opening up ditches and tributaries north of the railroad bridge and is now starting on those south of it.

Finally, Costello revealed that Lake Houston has lost almost 20% of its capacity due to sedimentation. To receive future dredging grants, the City must take steps to reduce the rate of sediment inflow. Costello revealed plans for a pilot sand-trap project in a point bar outside the Hallett mine far upstream. He said that the mine had agreed to remove trapped sediment there for free. Otherwise, he did not explain why a possibly more effective location closer to the problem area was not chosen for the pilot project.

For more details on each, see below.

Gates Details/Timeline

The purpose of adding more floodgates to the Lake Houston Dam: to lower the lake faster in advance of a flood.

  • The City must now start to lower the lake so far in advance of a storm that storms can veer away before they arrive. This wastes water.
  • The existing gates have 1/15th of the release capacity of the gates on Lake Conroe. This makes a joint pre-release strategy virtually impossible in extreme storms.

After examining and discarding the notion of adding crest gates to the spillway portion of the dam, the City is now focusing on adding 11 tainter gates to the earthen portion of the dam (east of the existing gates).

Proposed location for 11 new tainter gates.

With Mayor Sylvester Turner’s help, the City secured enough funding for construction during the regular session of this year’s legislature.

Next steps include:

  • 3/24 – New environmental and historic preservation assessments, Army Corps permitting
  • 12/24 – Construction plans completed
  • 1/25 – Bidding
  • 6/25 – Award Contract
  • 5/26 – Begin Construction

The success of this plan will require the election of a new Mayor and City Council Representative who are committed to the project. Early voting begins next week.

Dredging Volumes, Costs

Dredging at various locations around Lake Houston will likely be a continuous effort for years to come. Sedimentation has already reduced the capacity of Lake Houston an estimated 18%. The City estimates future yearly losses in the range of 360-460 acre feet per year.

Historic and projected capacity loss in Lake Houston due to sedimentation.

One acre roughly equals the size of a football field. So imagine 400 football fields covered with sludge a foot deep. Each year!

To keep this problem in check, the City is already looking at doing additional dredging on the East and West Forks. It and the Army Corps finished major projects in both areas less than four years ago.

East of Atascocita and south of the convergence of the East and West Forks, the City plans to spend another $34 million to remove almost 900,000 cubic yards of sediment.

To date, Costello estimates that dredging nearly 4 million cubic yards of material has cost $186 million.

Summary of dredging costs and volumes in Lake Houston since Harvey

The City hopes to recoup some of these costs by reselling sand that it recovers from “hilltops” in the lake. Costello showed the heat map below. Notice the heavy sediment concentrations in the lake’s headwaters. This is because sediment drops out of suspension where rivers slow down as they meet standing bodies of water.

In addition to reducing the volume of Lake Houston, the sediment also poses a flood threat. It reduces conveyance of the rivers and lake forcing water up and out. Sediment blockages, such as the mouth bar, can also form dams that back water up.

Costello also addressed the ongoing dredging of 17 canals around Lake Houston. He said the focus is now shifting to the southern part of the lake.

Sand Traps to Reduce Inflow

In addition to dredging sediment from the lake, Costello also emphasized the need to reduce sediment coming downstream via sand traps. This last effort may be a condition of future grants for dredging.

Costello described two pilot types of pilot projects that the City is working on with the SJRA and sand-mining industry. The first is “sand traps” dug in point bars outside sand mines. The second: in-channel traps.

The idea behind the traps: dig holes in the river or its sand bars where migrating sand can settle out of the flow before it reaches the lake.

The first project may be near the Hallett Mine on the West Fork. According to Costello, the mine has agreed to remove the sand for free, thus reducing long term maintenance costs.

During Q&A after Costello’s presentation, however, he admitted that the City has no plans to try to get sand mines to reduce illegal emissions. In one notable instance, the TCEQ documented 56 million gallons of sludge discharged into the West Fork by the LMI mine.

Controlling sediment is crucial in reducing flooding. Accumulated sediment reduces storage capacity and conveyance for stormwater. The smaller capacity means lakes and rivers will flood faster and higher.

For high res versions of all the slides shown in the Town Hall, see this PDF.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/17/23

2241 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Houston City Council Approves $29 Million More For Dredging, Sand Trap Tests

Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin has announced that Houston City Council unanimously accepted an additional $29,000,000 in state grant funds to continue dredging around the canals and channels of Lake Houston. The money will also help start a pilot program to trap sediment upstream before it reaches the lake, thereby hopefully reducing dredging costs in the long run.

East Side of Lake

The additional funding will allow dredging activities to start on the east side of Lake Houston in the various canals/channels. Martin emphasized, however, that they have some touch up work to do on Rogers Gully on the west side of the lake before they move to the east side.

Once on the east side, dredging will start near FM1960 and work its way south. The City has not yet established a firm timeline.

DRC will handle the dredging. That is the same company that has handled the dredging since the Corps finished its Emergency West Fork Dredging program several years ago.

The company will deposit the spoils at the same marina it has used for the last year.

DRC will reportedly use mechanical, not hydraulic dredging. That means, they’ll be working with long-armed excavators and scooping dirt onto pontoons. See second picture below.

Pilot Sand-Trap Program

Part of the $29 million will also go towards implementing a pilot program testing sand traps upstream of Lake Houston. The goal: capture silt and sediment coming down the San Jacinto West Fork before it ever reaches Lake Houston.

If successful, this could reduce long-term dredging costs. The pilot program will rely on sand miners to excavate sand from point bars outside their mines. But there are few, if any, mines upstream on Cypress and Spring Creeks, where the miners claim most of the sediment is coming from. So that could limit the replicability of the test, even if successful on the West Fork.

More than 4 Million Cubic Yards Dredged to Date

“Tremendous progress has been made since Hurricane Harvey through the completion of FEMA, Texas Water Development Board, Harris County, and City of Houston projects,” said Martin. “Since 2018, the total combined efforts of these entities have resulted in approximately 4,004,008 cubic yards of silt and sediment dredged from Lake Houston and its tributaries at a total cost of $222 million.” That money has come from federal, state, and local funding sources.

Rogers Gully Before Dredging
Example of canal dredging. Rogers Gully mouth bar in Atascocita before it was removed.
rogers gully mouth bar
This picture shows mechanical dredgers at work. This blockage was eventually removed, but some touch up work elsewhere reportedly remains.

Blockages like those above can back water up during storms, and flood homes and businesses.

Kudos

Martin passed out kudos to those who supported the $29 million appropriation. Martin thanked former State Representative Dan Huberty and Senator Brandon Creighton for their commitment to seeing this project through and their dedication to the long-term maintenance dredging on Lake Houston.

“Harris County Commissioner Precinct 3, Tom Ramsey, and Harris County Flood Control District have also been terrific partners,” said Martin. “I also want to thank my colleagues on City Council, Mayor Sylvester Turner for his unwavering support for Lake Houston, and Chief Recovery Officer Stephen Costello for his continued diligence on flood mitigation efforts.”

Status of Dredging District Legislation

State Representative Charles Cunningham introduced HB 5341 this year. The bill would have created a Lake Houston Dredging and Maintenance District to handle sediment issues like these in perpetuity. The bill received a public hearing on 4/11/23, but unfortunately, it has stalled in the Natural Resources Committee since then. So has HB 1093, a bill which would have assured cleanup of abandoned sand mines.

With time running out in this session, we will likely need to recycle those bills for the next session.

More news to follow when the dredging starts.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 5/11/2023 based on information from the Houston District E office and Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin

2081 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Lake Houston Gates Project Moves Closer to Reality

The Lake Houston Gates Project is moving closer to reality with breakthroughs on the benefit/cost ratio, funding and endorsements.

City of Houston Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin and Chief Recovery Officer Stephen Costello provided updates on 2/27/23 at City Hall on the Lake Houston Gates Project. The wide-ranging, hour-long discussion covered several related topics. They included:

  • A critical path for construction
  • Dredging of the lake
  • Funding for gates and dredging
  • Several related engineering studies
  • A favorable ruling from FEMA on the Benefit-Cost Ratio
  • An endorsement to the area’s legislators by the Greater Houston Partnership.

Need For Gates

For those new to the area, the City of Houston has been pushing to add gates to the Lake Houston Dam ever since Harvey in 2017. Upstream, Lake Conroe’s gates can release 150,000 cubic feet per second (CFS). But Lake Houston’s can only release 10,000 CFS.

The disparity in discharge capacity complicates joint-reservoir-management and pre-release strategies designed to avoid flooding by reducing the water level in Lake Houston.

Lake Houston releases cannot keep up with Lake Conroe’s. And pre-releasing water from Lake Houston takes so long that storms can veer away during the lowering process, often resulting in wasted water. That’s an important consideration for a water-supply lake.

According to Martin and Costello, the gate project will:

• Serve as the first phase of a long-term effort to extend the life of the Dam
• Enable the rapid lowering of lake levels in advance of a flood
• Eliminate the need for a seasonal lowering of both Lake Houston and Lake Conroe
• Provide potential water-rights savings
• Protect an estimated 5,000 residential properties in the surrounding area
• Yield an estimated half billion dollars in economic benefits during the life of the project

Gates, Funding, BCR, Studies

Preliminary engineering studies evaluated about a dozen different alternatives for adding discharge capacity to Lake Houston. The City initially favored adding crest gates to the spillway portion of the dam.

However, the City discarded that idea as “too risky” after further study. The engineering company cautioned the City that it would have a difficult time finding contractors willing to risk modifying a 70-year old concrete dam. The potential liability was just too great. So the City then revisited adding various numbers of tainter gates to the eastern, earthen portion of the dam.

Because tainter gates exceeded FEMA’s funding, the City had initially focused on crest gates. But after investigating the safety issues, the City decided to seek more funding for tainter gates instead.

The City now recommends adding 11 tainter gates.

Recommended location for new tainter gates is next to old ones, not farther east as I conjectured earlier.

The picture below is slightly wider and shows more of how both halves of the dam come together.

If funding comes through, new gates would go in the upper right along the earthen portion of the dam, next to the old gates.
Funding Needs

FEMA initially set aside $50 million for the gates. Plus Harris County committed $20 million in the 2018 Flood Bond to attract FEMA’s match. But the latest construction estimates show eleven tainter gates could cost between $200 and $250 million.

After engineering and environmental studies, only $68.3 million in funding remains. That includes an earmark secured by Congressman Dan Crenshaw. So the City is seeking another $150 million from the State of Texas. Martin and Costello have made weekly trips to Austin so far during this session to line up support from legislators, committee chairs, and the Texas Division of Emergency Management.

Social Benefits Improve Benefit/Cost Ratio

All this is suddenly possible because of a favorable ruling from FEMA on the benefit-cost ratio (BCR).

For years, Houston had struggled to get the BCR for the gate project above 1.0 (the point at which benefits exceed costs). Usually, FEMA strictly interprets benefits as “avoided damages to structures.”

But Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner and Costello met with FEMA to argue that the problem was much bigger than damaged structures.

As a result, FEMA allowed the City to add the value of “social benefits” to the BCR. Social benefits can include such things as avoiding lost wages when businesses are destroyed; transportation disruptions that reduce the region’s productivity; reducing negative impacts on student achievement when schools are disrupted; and more.

The social-benefit ruling covers a number of City projects, not just the gates. It should also benefit other areas, especially rural ones.

Said Costello, “The minute the social benefits came in, everything was great.” Instead of struggling to reach 1.0, the City is now far above it.

Greater Houston Partnership Endorsement

With that out of the way, the Greater Houston Partnership wrote a powerful letter to state legislators seeking their support for the gate project. See below.

Greater Houston Partnership letter endorsing Lake Houston Gates. For a printable PDF, click here.

The Partnership includes business leaders from 900 member companies in the 12-county Houston Region.

Dredging Update

While pressing ahead with the gates project, the City is also working on a long-term dredging plan for the lake and working with the SJRA on sedimentation and sand-trap pilot projects.

The Texas Water Department Board (TWDB) has estimated sediment inflow to Lake Houston at about 380 acre-feet of material annually.

The lake has already lost more than 20,000 acre feet of capacity due to sedimentation. That worsens flooding. While the Federal Government supports efforts to improve Lake Houston now, the chances of getting more money in the future will be reduced – unless we can show that we’re at least keeping pace with annual sediment deposits.

Since Harvey, FEMA, the Army Corps, TWDB, and City of Houston have removed almost 4 million cubic yards of material from the lake at a cost of $226 million.

We have to prevent more sediment from coming downstream or dredge it after it gets here.

Stephen Costello, City of Houston Chief Recovery Officer

The City is currently lobbying for another $50 million for maintenance dredging to add to the money secured in the last legislative session by now-retired State Representative Dan Huberty. New Representative Charles Cunningham will reportedly now carry that banner forward along with State Senator Brandon Creighton.

Legislative News to Follow

March 10th is the last day to file bills in the Texas Legislature this year. Please visit the legislation page on ReduceFlooding.com for updates once bills are filed and start moving forward in Austin.

Thanks to all of our elected and appointed representatives who have pushed so hard on so many fronts for the last 2008 days to tie all the pieces of this complicated flood-mitigation puzzle together.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 2/27/2023

2008 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Bayou Land Conservancy Raises Concerns About SJRA Sand Trap Proposal

The Bayou Land Conservancy has added its voice to those raising concerns about the SJRA’s sand trap proposal for the San Jacinto River watershed. The pilot project began out of a desire to reduce sediment buildup in the mouth bar of the West Fork. But it has morphed into something very different – a trench through a sand bar more than 12 miles upstream.

In March 2022, the SJRA published its long-awaited proposal on sediment removal and sand trap development along with a brief summary. It now seeks public comment through April 29, 2022.

Location of recommended sediment trap outside Hallett mine
Sand bar on West Fork San Jacinto that would be used for pilot project outside Hallett mine. Note that the height of the freshly deposited sand is engulfing several medium sized trees. This location is downstream from several other large mines. Picture taken shortly after Harvey.

BLC’s General Concerns with Study

I posted my concerns on 3/27/22. Yesterday, the Bayou Land Conservancy (BLC) sent me a copy of its letter. It reflected some of the same concerns I had.

  • The study did not address what should be the main goal of sediment removal: excessive deposition in the area of the mouth bar downstream of US 59.
  • Managing mouth bar sediment deposition, and related flooding, should be kept at the forefront as this project moves forward.
  • Sand mining in the floodplain of the San Jacinto West Fork between 1995 and 2017 virtually quadrupled. More than 30% of the river’s flood plain is now being mined. That’s a huge problem that requires other types of solutions to reduce sedimentation from mines, such as improved Best Management Practices.

The group also suggested a need for greater oversight of sand mining by state regulators. It feels an inconsistency exists between in-stream mining via sand traps and the TCEQ’s newly adopted BMPs for sand mining.

BLC’s Specific Concerns re: Recommendation

BLC then went on to discuss the specific recommendation – rock-lined trenches through sand bars outside of sand mines. They listed three concerns:

  1. “River migration and erosion: Changes in river course, including erosion and deposition of sediment, are naturally occurring processes. Installation of hardscape or mechanical features within the flowing part of the river will have an impact on this natural process and could lead to increased erosion in the area surrounding the facility, increased sediment transport downstream, and destabilization of the stream to the detriment of the surrounding and downstream communities.”
  2. “Water quality: 85% of the drinking water needs of the Houston metropolitan region are met by Lake Houston, at the receiving end of the San Jacinto River. Instead of occasional turbidity increase during dredging of the mouth bar, sand trapping could create a long-term elevation in turbidity leading to increased water treatment costs for the entire region, transferring the cost to the public from private interests. Additionally, the riverbed contains chemical components that may need to be addressed in water treatment at additional public expense.”
  3. “Accountability: the governing legislation created by HB1824 does not address the question of accountability should the private interest in the sediment trap fail to protect the public’s interest or go out of business without remediating the in-stream mining facility.”

More Study Recommended Before Implementation

BLC also recommended that two of the study’s recommendations deserve to be prioritized and expanded to provide as much accurate data as possible before sand-traps get further consideration:

  1. “Evaluate total annual sediment load transported to Lake Houston, including the area downstream of proposed sediment traps, and compare to anticipated trapped sediment loads.”
  2. “Perform further geomorphic assessment to address potential downstream instabilities due to removing sediment and to determine appropriate sediment removal volumes.”

BLC went on to encourage SJRA to extensively study the holistic sediment story of the upper San Jacinto River watershed. Previous studies point to Spring and Cypress Creeks as major contributors of sediment. BLC wants the sediment loads in those creeks studied as well as the areas downstream of the proposed sand traps.

The group continued, “A science-based, peer-reviewed, methodology of assessing the sediment budget of the watershed is imperative before assuming that removing sediment from any single location on the river will have a positive impact on mouth bar deposition. … Without a basis for understanding the sediment budget for the West Fork, it’s impossible to evaluate (or approve) this project.”

Rivers in Texas Are Public Property

BLC also pointed out that even though HB1824 exempted SJRA and Harris County Flood Control District from any requirement to obtain a permit, pay a fee, or purchase the material taken, in Texas the contents of a river belong to the citizens of the state. “Therefore we all have an interest in the results of this in-stream mining proposal,” said the group’s letter.

The letter concluded, “BLC recommends that extensive further study be undertaken to determine if in-stream mining, i.e. sand traps, will accomplish the stated goal of providing a long-term solution for managing the mouth bar deposition, without creating further instability to the river system and negative impacts to the surrounding and downstream communities.“

Here is their full letter.

The Bayou Land Conservancy, one of the leading environmental groups in the Lake Houston watershed, preserves land along streams for flood control, clean water, and wildlife.

How Taking Sediment Out of a River Can Increase Erosion

Non-technical people may have trouble understanding how taking sediment out of a river can increase erosion. Basically, if you take too much out (more than the natural baseline of dissolved sediment), it can create a “hungry water” effect. Many academics have documented the hungry water effect. It’s especially noticeable downstream of dams, which are notorious for trapping sediment. Rivers with excess sediment transport capacity tend to erode their banks and streamed to compensate.

To Register Your Opinion

To register your opinions, pro or con, with the SJRA, email  floodmanagementdivision@sjra.net no later than April 29, 2022.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/9/2022 based on a Bayou Land Conservancy letter to SJRA

1684 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.

TWDB Advances 4 of 5 SJRA Grant Applications for Flood Infrastructure Funding

The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) has advanced four of five San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) abridged grant applications to the next round for consideration. TWDB named them as priorities for the 2020 Flood Infrastructure Fund (FIF) cycle. That advances SJRA one step closer to funding for the projects. 

SJRA Now Invited to Submit Full Applications


With these rankings, SJRA will now submit full grant applications for four projects for approval. In the two-stage process, applicants first submit an abridged application. TWDB then prioritizes them within the overall available funding capacity. 

Senate Bill 7 last year made the Flood Infrastructure Fund (FIF) possible. Senator Brandon Creighton sponsored it. The Legislature passed it and Texas voters approved it through a constitutional amendment. FIF provides financial assistance in the form of loans and grants for flood control, flood mitigation, and drainage projects. 

Why SJRA Seeks Grants, Partnerships

As with most Texas river authorities, SJRA is not a taxing entity, therefore these large-scale flood mitigation projects require regional and local partnerships as well as grant funding.

“Hundreds of abridged applications were submitted by entities—cities, counties, other political subdivisions—as part of this competitive process. We are very proud SJRA was selected to move ahead in the approval process on four of our five abridged grant applications,” said Chuck Gilman, SJRA Director of Water Resources and Flood Management. “The next step is to find local partners who, along with SJRA, will commit to the local-match funding and in-kind services. These large-scale, impactful projects come with a very high price tag. It will take a regional approach with various funding commitments to see these projects through to completion. The FIF funding is an essential piece of that process.”

Flood Infrastructure Fund Criteria

According to Flood Infrastructure Fund criteria, eligible projects must fall under one of four categories:

  1. Flood Protection Planning for Watersheds
  2. Planning, Acquisition, and Design, Construction/Rehabilitation
  3. Federal Award Matching Funds
  4. Measures Immediately Effective in Protecting Life and Property

TWDB will review the full grant applications and make final selections for grant and loan funding later this year. 

SJRA

Proposed Projects Advancing to Next Round


Upper San Jacinto River Basin Regional Sedimentation Study 

Would identify and create a plan for implementing potential sedimentation solutions in the Upper San Jacinto River Basin (Lake Houston watershed). It would evaluate the input, output, and storage of sediment for the entire basin as well as for sub-watersheds.  

LMI River Bend Sand Mine on San Jacinto West Fork exposes more than 500 acres of sand to floodwaters. Altogether, sand mines expose approximately 20 square miles of sand along the West Fork to floodwaters in a 20 mile stretch between I-45 and US59.
Spring Creek Watershed Flood Control Dams Conceptual Engineering Feasibility Study 

Would perform a conceptual engineering feasibility study of two potential dam/reservoir locations within the Spring Creek watershed. This is the next phase of the Spring Creek Siting Study, which is currently being completed as part of the San Jacinto Regional Watershed Master Drainage Plan. Harris County Flood Control District leads the Master Drainage Plan effort. SJRA and other regional partners support it.

Lake Conroe – Lake Houston Joint Reservoir Operations Study 

Would develop a joint reservoir operations and communications strategy for Lake Conroe and Lake Houston. 
The City of Houston is currently studying new tainter gates for the Lake Houston dam. They could greatly increase the controlled release capacity. 

The main goal of the plan: to determine the most efficient and safe operation of the two reservoirs in series. The study would evaluate multiple individual components of a joint operational strategy. 

It will evaluate:

  • Operational synergy between the two reservoirs
  • Joint notification and communications protocols
  • Pre-release
  • Impacts on water supply
  • Use of forecasting tools.

This project will benefit both water supply and flood mitigation in the region.

Flood Early Warning System for San Jacinto County 

Would provide for installation of rain and river/stream gages at three locations identified as critical by San Jacinto County to provide early warning information to the county during storm events.  

Locations:

  • Winters Bayou at State Highway 150
  • East Fork San Jacinto River at FM 945
  • Peach Creek at FM 3081. 

Rain and river/stream stage data obtained at the sites would be transmitted to SJRA’s ALERT2 network and displayed on SJRA’s Contrail system. The data could be viewed online via SJRA’s website. That lets San Jacinto County staff and residents view the data at any time.

Not Advancing to Next Round

The SJRA had also submitted a first-round grant application to develop preliminary designs for sand traps. The sand traps were supposed to reduce the amount of sediment moving downstream. SJRA confirmed that this grant application will not move forward.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 9/24/2020 based on input from SJRA

1122 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Details of SJRA Application to TWDB for Grant to Develop Sand Traps

In March, the San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) awarded engineering firm Freese & Nichols a $250,000 work order for “Conceptual Design” of sand traps. Then in June, SJRA applied for a $200,000 grant from the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) for “Preliminary Design” of sand traps on the West Fork. What’s this all about? How do the projects relate? Are they worthwhile?

West Fork 90% Blocked After Harvey

After Harvey, the Army Corps documented that the West Fork had become 90% blocked by sediment in places. That contributed to the flooding of thousands of homes and businesses. It also triggered a massive dredging program that is still ongoing. Finally, it launched a search for solutions that stretched all the way to Austin (plus, interestingly, Kerrville and San Antonio). See more below.

SB1824 Opens Door for Sand Traps

House Bill 1824 was introduced by State Rep. Murr from Kerrville and sponsored by Senator Flores from San Antonio. Approved last year, it allows SJRA and Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) to remove material from the San Jacinto River and its tributaries to restore, maintain, or expand storm flow capacity without the need for “state permitting” or royalty payments to the state.

SJRA and HCFCD hope to mitigate flooding by constructing one or more “sand traps.” Their plan calls for partnering with Aggregate Production Operations (APOs) in the vicinity of the sand trap(s) to clean them out periodically. It’s not yet clear whether APO’s would do this for a fee, or do it for the sand. One thing is clear, at this point, however. APO’s don’t want to go far. All the locations under consideration are next to sand mines.

Freese & Nichols Already Underway with Phase 1

The first phase of the project, Freese & Nichols’ conceptual design, is currently underway. It includes:

  • Evaluating potential sand trap locations and trapping effectiveness
  • Developing conceptual sand trap designs
  • Determining downstream benefits of potential sand trap solutions
  • Recommending which site(s) to carry forward into preliminary engineering.

Phase 2 of Pilot Goes Further

The goal: to move forward with preliminary engineering on two sites, with the likely construction of at least one. This small scale effort, involving only one or two sand traps, is intended to act as a “pilot” before a more costly, full-scale program.

Preliminary results in the first phase indicate that the sand traps will likely be located along the West Fork.

However, to move beyond conceptual design, even on the pilot, SJRA needs more money to supplement local match resources.

If successful, the TWDB grant application for preliminary design will cover:

  • Environmental permitting investigation
  • Preliminary land acquisition efforts
  • Survey
  • Geotechnical investigation
  • 30% design efforts.

Need for Sediment Control of Some Sort

To date, more than 2.3 million cubic yards of material have been removed from the West Fork, at a cost of more than $90 million. An additional $30 million has been dedicated to continue these efforts. SJRA hopes sand traps will help protect that investment.

It seems, though, that reducing sediment coming out of sand mines might be a simpler, less-risky, more cost-effective solution.

Benefits

Long-term benefits beyond the initial sand trap development “pilot” project are anticipated to potentially extend beyond the immediate benefit area.

Benefits include potential reduction of sediment load entering Lake Houston.

Primary benefit area is in purple along West Fork. Secondary benefit area is in green (Lake Houston).

SJRA can not yet quantify the level of flood mitigation provided by the sand trap(s). However, restoring or expanding storm flow capacity could potentially remove structures from the floodplain, they say. The conceptual design phase currently underway will attempt to evaluate downstream hydraulic benefits.

Timing

If this abridged application succeeds, SJRA will need to submit a more detailed application. TWDB won’t report results on that until late this year.

Freese & Nichols should report the results of their conceptual study this September.

SJRA anticipates it can complete the preliminary engineering study in 18 months. However, construction will take longer – up to 36 months.

Next Steps

If results of this pilot project indicate that sand traps are a feasible and effective solution, a larger program in various locations throughout the basin could be implemented.

Preliminary cost estimates will be developed as part of the conceptual design phase currently underway. So SJRA has not yet determined a benefit/cost ratio.

However, the cost of dredging has proved substantial. And the cost of flooding during Harvey proved astronomical. Reducing those costs just 1% could easily justify the cost of this project.

We have too many unknowns at this point to pass judgment.

  • How much will the project cost?
  • Will sand traps be effective?
  • Who will maintain a trap when a sand mine goes out of business?
  • What will the environmental impact be?
  • Will the traps accelerate erosion and jeopardize infrastructure such as pipelines and bridges?
  • Is this the opening volley in an effort to begin large-scale river mining?

Scientific literature and news reports on sand traps generally indicate mixed results.

I will withhold judgement until I learn more.

To review the abridged application, click here.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/9/2020

1045 Days after Hurricane Harvey

City Applies for TWDB Grants to Turn Woodridge Village Into Detention Basin and More

Correction on 7/4/2020: The article below was based on a City of Houston District E newsletter. It inferred that the City “applied for” five grants (in bullet points below). Other entities, such as the SJRA, applied for those. Mayor Pro Tem Dave Martin personally supports them.

The City of Houston has submitted several applications to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) for Flood Infrastructure Fund dollars. Among the projects was one for Taylor Gully Flood Damage Reduction. It consists of evaluating flood reduction alternatives plus design, permitting, and construction of a detention basin located on a 278 acre site to the north of the Elm Grove subdivision.

Looking SW at Woodridge Village as of 6/16/2020

Woodridge Project One of Six Apps

Other applications include:

  • San Jacinto River Sand Trap Development
  • Spring Creek Watershed Flood Control Dams Conceptual Engineering
  • Upper San Jacinto River Basin Regional Sedimentation Study
  • Lake Conroe-Lake Houston Joint Reservoir Operations Study
  • Harris County MUD #153 Siltation Reduction

“All of these projects submitted for funding promote regional resiliency and future sustainability in an effort to protect life and property from future flooding,” said Mayor Pro Tem and District E City Council Member Dave Martin. “The ability to submit these projects to the TWDB for funding would not be possible without State Senator Brandon Creighton’s writing of Senate Bill 7. We continue to applaud the Senator for his forward thinking and hope to receive funding for these projects. State Representative Dan Huberty has also been a vocal proponent for resiliency within our area and just beyond the City boundary. We are thankful to have him as a local engaged leader.”

Looking NW from US59 (foreground) over San Jacinto West Fork at the confluence of Spring Creek (left) and the West Fork (right). Spring Creek splits off to left. Its watershed contains several natural areas that might make candidates for flood control dams.

Neither Martin, nor his office, provided additional details on any of the grant applications.

However, from the wording of the release, it sounds as though state leaders are fully aligned and engaged to support the projects.

Woodridge Village Project Has Long History

The grants, if approved, could help reduce flooding throughout the Lake Houston Area.

The Taylor Gully/Woodridge Village project is the most urgent. Homes around the troubled development flooded twice last year. At a Kingwood Townhall meeting in February, Martin said the County should pay for 100% of that project. But then the County demanded that the City should pay for half of the purchase price of the land. And at the next Commissioners’ Court meeting, Commissioner Ellis changed the deal again. He demanded that the City pay for half of the construction costs also.

Both the City and County have been silent on any deal since then. The County refused a Freedom of Information Act request to release the text of the motion, which was approved in a public meeting. They even protested release of the information to the State Attorney General.

Putting Application in Historical Context

The following is speculation, but speculation based on the historical context. It appears that when County Commissioners voted to demand that the City come up with half the the purchase AND construction costs, the City found it hard. The grant application, if successful, is a way for the City to help the people of Elm Grove, who flooded twice last year after Perry Homes cleared 268 acres of adjacent land.

At the time of the floods, less than 25% of the planned detention pond capacity was in place. Perry has since developed additional detention ponds that provide the other 75%.

However, even that probably won’t be enough to absorb a 100-year rain. That’s because Perry Homes rushed to have the project approved before NOAA’s new Atlas-14 precipitation frequency tables went into effect. The new Atlas-14 standard would require about 40% more detention capacity. And that’s what the purchase is all about.

Rumor has it that political forces are aligned to accelerate this particular request.

Observations on Other Grant Applications

Of the other applications, two surprise me.

A joint reservoir operations study seems necessary. Currently, FEMA is funding a preliminary engineering study to add additional gates to the Lake Houston Spillway. If FEMA also approved the money for construction of the gates, they will be a game changer.

The Spring Creek Watershed flood control dams would provide additional upstream detention. Community leaders identified that as a high priority after Harvey. They would reduce the amount of water coming downstream during a flood.

Harris County MUD #153 contains Lake Houston shoreline where silt from Rogers Gully has accumulated. Earlier this year, Harris County Flood Control cleared a large part of the Gully, but the part owned by the City remains clogged with a mouth bar.

Sand bar blocking mouth of Rogers Gully has backed up water and contributed to flooding. Photo taken 6/16/2020.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/3/2020

1039 Days since Hurricane Harvey

Video From Boat of 7.5-Acre Area in San Jacinto West Fork Mined for Sand

Yesterday, I posted pictures taken from a helicopter of a 7.5-acre sand bar in the San Jacinto West Fork that had been mined without a permit. Then last night, Josh Alberson sent me some video from a boat of the same area. Gabe Gosney, a passenger in Alberson’s jet boat, shot the video on GoPro and wants to share it with the community.

Giant Sand Bar Now Looks Like Example of Pit Capture

The area in question lies on the west side of the river, just south of SH99. When Alberson first saw it, he excitedly texted me, saying he found an example of “pit capture” on the West Fork. The only problem: there was no pit to capture. And no recent flood.

As Alberson sped down the West Fork, he spotted the area and slowed. Gosney shot hand held from the boat. Here’s what the carnage looked like from the river.

3 minute 15 second video by Gabe Gosney of 7.5 acre area in San Jacinto West Fork being mined for sand.

Changes to Riverine Environment

Several things become apparent immediately upon viewing the video.

  • Humans caused extensive damage to the river ecosystem (property of the state).
  • What looked like the edge of a sand bar from 300 feet up in a helicopter is actually small piles of sand left by the miners.
  • River current now flows through the mined area, but at a slower rate than the river itself.
  • Trees that used to form a small part of the edge of the bar in one area have toppled.
The sand bar outlined above in this Google Earth satellite image from 12/1/2019 no longer exists.
It has been mined out of existence.

Alberson says the river was up about a foot to a foot and a half compared to normal because of the SJRA’s seasonal release of 529 cubic feet per second from Lake Conroe. He said the current was quite fast – difficult to stand in. He did not get out of the boat to see how deep the water was in the mined area, but his impression was that it was shallow.

Mining Not Permitted According to Authorities

The TCEQ regulates mining in the floodplain. Texas Parks and Wildlife Division regulates mining in the river. And the SJRA has commissioned a study on the possibility of building “sand traps” in the river.

All three groups say they have no record of issuing any permits for river mining in the San Jacinto.

Potential Dangers

During floods, the dying trees you see in the video will dislodge and float downstream where they will cause property damage or get lodged in bridge supports, form dams, and cause flooding.

When floodwaters spread out in this area, they will slow and deposit their sediment load. However, where the river channel becomes narrower downstream, the river will speed up again and likely accelerate erosion of river banks and other people’s property.

Texas Parks and Wildlife is investigating. More news to follow.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/24/2020 with thanks to Josh Alberson and Gabe Gosney

969 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.

TPWD Investigates River Mining Without Permit on San Jacinto West Fork

A 7.5-acre point bar outside a San Jacinto West Fork sand mine has disappeared, the apparent victim of river mining. River mining is prohibited in many countries because of its dangers. Texas does not prohibit it, but taxes it at a higher rate than floodplain mining to discourage the practice. The dangers include:

  • Upstream and downstream erosion
  • Destruction of riverbanks and river properties
  • Undermining infrastructure (such as bridges and pipelines)
  • Increases in turbidity
  • Lowering of the water table
  • Loss of riparian vegetation.
Location of River Mining on West Fork Just South of Highway 99

No Permits on File With Key Regulatory Bodies

A check with the San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA), Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), and Texas Parks and Wildlife Division (TPWD) showed the following:

A TCEQ investigator has spoken to the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD) Wetlands Conservation Program. “If the facility is digging in or very near the water’s edge,” said the TCEQ’s Jonathan Walling, “the facility would most likely need a permit from TPWD.”

Tom Heger of TPWD said Montgomery County Parks & Wildlife officials are investigating.

Compare the satellite image above to the shots below. Google Earth measurements show the sand bar that no longer exists was bigger than most of the pits in the mine itself.

Looking downriver, you can still see outlines of point bar and marks from excavator.
Close up of marks left by teeth of excavator.
Looking toward West Fork where point bar used be. Vehicle tracks lead back to mine behind camera position.
Pits created in the river.
Relationship of river mining to flood plain mine in background.
Well-used road between excavation and mine.
The disappearance of sand is not because of the seasonal release of water from Lake Conroe. Hundreds of bars both up and downstream appeared normal.
Google Earth shows the river to be approximately 350 feet wide at this point.

Texas Rules on River Mining

The State of Texas governs the taking of sand from rivers. See the regulations and laws on this FAQ page at: https://tpwd.texas.gov/faq/landwater/sand_gravel/. Key points include:

  •  If the stream is perennial (flows most of the time), or is more than 30 feet wide between the banks (even if it is dry most of the time), the State claims the bed and the sand and gravel in it as State-owned. 
  • A permit from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is required to “disturb or take” streambed materials from a streambed claimed by the State.

According to TPWD, the operator did not have a permit. In fact, no one on the entire San Jacinto river has a permit, according to TPWD.

How River Mining Degrades River Beds/Channels: Academic Insights

San Diego State University summarizes some of the issues associated with river mining. The paragraph below, taken from their excellent website, explains why most governments discourage river mining.

…bed degradation occurs when mineral extraction increases the flow capacity of the channel. A pit excavation locally increases flow depth and a barskimming operation increases flow width. Both conditions produce slower streamflow velocities and lower flow energies, causing sediments arriving from upstream to deposit at the mining site. As streamflow moves beyond the site and flow energies increase in response to the “normal” channel form downstream, the amount of transported sediment leaving the site is now less than the sediment carrying capacity of the flow. This sediment-deficient flow or “hungry” water picks up more sediment from the stream reach below the mining site, furthering the bed degradation process.

G. Mathias Kondolf of the University of California/Berkeley published this illustrated paper on the hungry water effect.

Professor Kondolf also published “Geomorphic and environmental effects of instream gravel
mining.” It contains an excellent, well documented discussion of the impacts of river mining.

SEDIMENT MINING IN ALLUVIAL CHANNELS: PHYSICAL EFFECTS AND MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES by M. RINALDI, B. WYZGA and N. SURIAN contains an thorough discussion of the dangers of river mining and public policy. (Warning: Copyrighted paper; costs $49.)

Mine Ownership

According to the TCEQ, the sand mine in the photos is called the Spring Wet Sand and Gravel Plant. Their registration database shows Multisource Sand And Gravel Co., Ltd. owns and operates it, under APO registration number AP0002459. Multisource Sand and Gravel Co. Ltd. is based in San Antonio at 126 East Turbo Drive. It is a subsidiary of Sage LLC. Lee C. McCarty and Benjamin Davis manage it from the Turbo Drive offices.  Daniel E. McCarty and Lee C. McCarty manage Sage.

The mine owners could not be reached for comment. Their phones went unanswered, perhaps because of the COVID crisis.

Posted by Bob Rehak on 4/23/2020

968 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.