An angry Houstonian wrote me earlier this week about a new RV park. It lies mostly in the floodway of Luce Bayou next to Huffman/Cleveland Road – near rotting shells of abandoned homes, repeatedly flooded. This is inside the City of Houston. So the City permitted it, not Harris County.
“The Retreat” Will Debut This Year
The developer bills it as an RV and camping resort called The Retreat. Copy says, “The premier destination is planned to include RV camping sites, cabins, tiny homes, wagons, and elevated yurts. Families, couples, and groups of all ages can enjoy fishing, kayaking, paddle boarding, walking trails, boating, outdoor games, lounging at the pool, and more!” Sounds idyllic until you drive around in the surrounding neighborhoods and see all the flood wreckage.
Is This Type of Development Safe for This Location?
I’m sure the developer will argue that:
The RVs are technically vehicles that can be moved out of harm’s way when floods come up.
Any permanent structures are built on higher ground in the 500-year floodplain.
A retention pond will offset any increase in runoff.
But do these arguments really hold water?
Will owners have time to evacuate everyone?
Will the ground be high enough after floodplain maps are redrawn?
How much water will the detention pond hold back if the river exceeds its banks?
During Harvey, people up and down the West Fork woke up in the middle of the night with water coming into their homes.
An architect who designs RV resorts told me it can easily take a novice half an hour to lower the trailer; disconnect electricity, water and septic lines; and hitch up a truck – in ideal conditions.
Now imagine you’re doing it during an intense rainfall and moving to the exit with a hundred other campers…at night…onto a two lane blacktop road…as the bridge goes under water…and the kids are crying.
How High is High Enough?
According to the Weather Channel, just two feet of water is enough to carry away most vehicles. They also say that water levels in flash floods can rise a foot in just five minutes. Six inches of water will reach the bottom of most passenger cars, causing loss of control and potential stalling. Finally, they say that water flowing at just 7 mph has as much force per unit area as wind in an EF5 tornado.
During Imelda, Archie Savage and Rosemary Fain, who live upstream, documented water bridging from the East Fork San Jacinto to Luce Bayou. If that happened again, campers could find themselves potentially cut off from escape routes.
Worse, flood maps have not yet been updated from Harvey and Imelda. The new 100-year flood is based on roughly 30-40% more rainfall. So floodways and floodplains in updated maps will soon expand beyond those shown below.
This image shows the location of the developer’s property between Luce Bayou and Huffman-Cleveland Road. The inter-basin transfer canal cuts across the bottom of the frame and FM2100 cuts diagonally through the upper right.Lake Houston is out of frame at the bottom.
FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer shows the extent to which the floodway and floodplains of Luce Bayou infringe on the property.All but the northwest corner near the letter “I’ is currently in a floodplain or floodway. That could soon change when flood maps are updated from Harvey.
FEMA’s base flood elevation viewer shows that in a 100-year flood, about three quarters of the property would go under 5 or more feet of water.Another 10-20% would go under 1-4 feet. Again, these maps are based on pre-Atlas 14 data.
The Retreat RV Resort and Campground
The lower part of the property is just a few feet about the river level.
Looking south toward the Huffman-Cleveland Road Bridge over Luce Bayou.
The detention pond actually appears to be several feet lower than the bayou. That won’t hold back much water in a flood. Note the green color.
No Prohibition, But Plenty of Warnings
Evidently, no laws or regulations prohibit this type of development. Chapter 19 of the City Code of Ordinances contains floodplain regulations but does not address recreational vehicles. Chapter 29 addresses recreational vehicles but does not address floodplains.
However, a website called RVParkUniversity.com which advises RV Park investors says, “RVs do float – but they’re not designed to. Floodplain and RVs do not get along well. So if you’re looking at buying an RV park that has “floodplain” shown on the survey, it cannot be taken lightly. Flood plains destroy your ability to obtain a loan, find a future buyer, and create huge liability for you with your customers.”
Also, the Texas Water Development Board advises people camping near water to ask the park operator about flood warnings and evacuation plans. The State does have regs that govern RV parks in floodplains. The problem is, the rules are easily circumvented. For instance, people can not leave campers in the same location for more than 180 days. But nothing prevents owners from getting around that by moving them to the next pad. In this way, temporary recreational amenities become permanent residences.
Up and down the East Fork, developers are building more such facilities.
Yesterday, I posted about how we often sow the seeds of our own disasters. This could be one of those cases in the making. Are we putting people in harm’s way without anticipating the speed or magnitude of the next big flood?
Posted by Bob Rehak on February 26, 2021
1277 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 526 since Imelda
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/RV-Resort-Outline.jpg?fit=1200%2C827&ssl=18271200adminadmin2021-02-26 19:53:172021-02-27 09:21:22RV Park Being Built in Luce Bayou Floodway, Floodplain
Here’s a digest of recent flood-related happenings. Follow the links for more detailed information.
Texas’ First-Ever Regional Flood Planning Process Gets Underway
The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) is helping recently formed regional-flood planning groups deliver 15 regional flood plans by January of 2023. These regional flood plans will form Texas’ first-ever state flood plan, due to the legislature by September of 2024.
The Board designated flood-planning group members on October 1st. The regional flood planning group meetings are publicly posted under the Texas Open Meetings Act. The first meetings were posted on the TWDB website and the Secretary of State website. Groups have two objectives:
Reduce current flood risk
Prevent creation of new flood risk
Flood Projects Move Closer to Funding
Flood projects eligible for funding through the State’s Flood Infrastructure Fund (FIF) moved one step closer to becoming a reality this week. Select applicants are currently submitting complete (as opposed to abridged) project applications to the TWDB. These applications will help Texas communities finance drainage and flood mitigation and control projects.
Eligible entities submitted 280 abridged applications for more than $2.3 billion in financial assistance.
TWDB culled that list to fit the available $770 million in funding for structural and nonstructural flood projects. Of that $770 million, TWDB will allocate $231 million (30 percent) to grants and $539 million (70 percent) to loans with no interest.
TWDB Chairman Peter Lake characterized this program as one of the biggest steps the State has ever taken toward flood mitigation.
As of November 5, 2020, the TWDB had received 125 applications from cities, counties, water districts, and other political subdivisions. The deadline for full applications is November 23.
Spring Creek Flood Control Dams Conceptual Engineering Study
Lake Conroe/Lake Houston Joint Operations Study
Flood Early Warning System for San Jacinto County
Chuck Gilman, SJRA’s Director of Water Resources and Flood Management, said, “We hope to receive final notice on our four full applications in late December or early January.”
“The causes and effects of flooding vary from region to region, so there is no single ‘silver bullet’ solution to mitigate floods,” said Lake. “It is critical that we support Texas communities as they plan for and mitigate future risks based on their unique needs and circumstances.”
The Board will consider approving financial assistance commitments at public meetings in the coming months.“Financial assistance will help communities with both flood planning and project implementation. While we can’t avoid natural disasters, we can mitigate the damage they do,” said Lake.
Fire and Flooding
Fire and flooding may seem like a strange combination. But yes, fire can contribute to flooding. I first noticed this phenomenon on an island called Guanaja in the Bay of Honduras where I used to scuba dive. One year, poachers set fires at the bottom of a hill to drive exotic tropical birds toward nets at the top of the hill. The next year, half the hill slid into the Caribbean during heavy rains.
So what does that have to do with Houston? As drought approaches, developers continue to set fires to clear land. That kills all the grasses that retain soil. When rain does return, that soil will wash downstream and likely contribute to the mouth bar growing on the San Jacinto East Fork. Reduction of the river’s “conveyance” can back water up and contribute to flooding.
Drought Vs. Flooding
Jeff Lindner, Harris County Meteorologist says, “The focus for the last several years has been on flooding and heavy rainfall. We’ve had floods in some portion of Texas for each of the last 5 years. However, the onset of moderate to strong La Niña conditions in the Pacific appear to be swinging the state back toward a dry period.”
“What was predicted to be an active period next week is slowly decreasing both “cold” and “moisture” wise in recent model runs, as is typical in La Nina winters,” says Lindner.
Climate Prediction Center outlooks for the next two weeks indicate below average rainfall and above average temperatures. Similar outlooks continue for three months. Vegetation health will continue to decline, but likely at a slower rate than during the hot summer months when heat is maximized.
Three month outlook from NOAA predicts below average rainfall across southern US.
So be careful of outdoor burning (see story above). Many counties have already imposed outdoor burn bans.
Note outdoor burn ban in Liberty County.
The only positive side of drought is that it can make ideal construction weather for flood-mitigation projects (see two stories above).
Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force Has First Meeting
The Harris County Community Flood Resilience Task Force held its first meeting earlier this month. The first order of business: expand the group’s membership from five to 17. The group is creating a web site which will accept online applications; it should be up shortly.
The application deadline: December 11. Stay alert for more information if you are interested in representing your area. Preference will be given to those:
Who have flooded
Represent flood-prone communities
Have knowledge in certain areas, such as housing, public health, engineering/construction, urban design/planning, flood-risk mitigation, environment, etc.
Water Baron of Montgomery County Takes On World; Lawyers Drool
Simon Sequeira, CEO of Quadvest and the Water Baron of Montgomery County, continues his War with the World. At the last GMA14 meeting, lawyers are reportedly lining up to get a piece of the action and licking their lips.
Sequeira also supplies water to Colony Ridge in Liberty County. Several years ago, he led a fight to get the board of the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District elected rather than appointed. Then he backed candidates who favored unlimited groundwater pumping and promised to Restore Affordable Water.
Broken Promises
While groundwater is cheaper than surface water, water bills reportedly failed to come down. However, he has stopped paying the SJRA. Sequeira says he is setting aside that money in a special fund in case he loses his legal battle with the SJRA. But his legal battles go far beyond the SJRA. He’s also taking on the rest of GMA14.
GMA14 includes the 15 colored counties above, each represented by a different conservation district. Montgomery County (dark blue) has the Lonestar Groundwater Conservation District.
Purpose of Groundwater Management Areas
GMA stands for groundwater management area. GMAs were set up years ago, in part, to make sure that one county doesn’t hog groundwater, depriving surrounding areas and creating subsidence. So the other counties in GMA14 get to approve (or not) the groundwater withdrawal rates in Montgomery County.
They do that by defining “desired future conditions.” How much drawdown in an aquifer is acceptable? How much subsidence can people and infrastructure tolerate?
GMA14 wants Sequeira to leave 70% of the water in aquifers intact and to produce no more than 1 foot of subsidence.
Hired-Gun Experts Defy Scientific Consensus
Ever since, Sequeira took on this fight, his hired-gun experts have been trying to prove subsidence doesn’t pose a threat in Montgomery County. Unfortunately, data and models don’t agree with him. His pumping has already created subsidence in MoCo and now threatens northern Harris County, too.
Strangely enough, while science has shown – and the rest of the world believes – that unlimited groundwater pumping causes subsidence, Sequeira does not. His profit margin depends on cheap groundwater, unfettered by fees designed to encourage people to convert to surface water.
Five Alternative Plans Considered
Sequeira and company originally proposed three alternative plans to GMA14 that involved pumping:
900 feet of decline in the Jasper Aquifer
700 feet of decline in the Jasper Aquifer
250 feet of decline in the Jasper Aquifer (Similar to Run D scenario, modeled below.)
Of those three, GMA14 only considered the last (even though Lone Star and GMA14 use different criteria to describe the volume pumped).
GMA14 countered by adding two more alternatives that involved even less pumping:
115,000 acre-feet per year (Similar to Lone Star’s Run D scenario. See below).
97,000 acre-feet per year
61,000 acre-feet per year
The two sides are still arguing about how much can be pumped safely. And that’s why the lawyers are drooling.
Models Show Unacceptable Subsidence from Sequeira’s Least Damaging Plan
Subsidence can alter the landscape in ways that cause water to collect in areas that otherwise might not flood. The maps below model projected subsidence in south Montgomery and northern Harris Counties. And we know that this model under-predicts subsidence. That’s because it doesn’t model ANY subsidence from the Jasper aquifer.
Sequeira’s least damaging plan would cause up to 3.25 feet of subsidence in southern Montgomery County and up to 3 feet in northern Harris County, according to GMA14. See below.
Pumping 115,000 feet per year would cause up to 3.25 feet of subsidence in southern MoCo.
The same amount of pumping would cause up 3 feet of subsidence in parts of Kingwood and Huffman, and a foot or more in much of the rest of Harris County.
Effect on Humble, Kingwood, Atascocita, Huffman Areas
If you live in the Lake Houston Area and you stare at that last subsidence map long enough, eventually you will come to a jaw-dropping realization. The Lake Houston spillway is only subsiding by a foot. But the headwaters of the lake are subsiding up to 3 feet. Imagine filling your bathtub with water and then tilting it two feet.
Homes and businesses in the headwaters of Lake Houston will be lowered2 feet relative to the spillway.
That’s a huge amount. Those who built homes a foot above the hundred year flood-plain would find themselves a foot below it. Those who had a couple inches of water in their homes would have more than two feet after subsidence.
Battle Lines Drawn
So the battle lines are drawn. Sequeira wants to allow up to 900 feet of decline in the Jasper aquifer. And GMA14 wants no more than 1 foot of subsidence with 70% of the aquifer intact. That would mean pumping less than 100,000 acre feet per year.
The presence of so many lawyers in the last GMA14 meeting reportedly has the smaller groundwater management districts nervous. One observer used the word “intimidated.” Some don’t have financial resources to fight Sequeira.
Lawyers I talk to believe Sequeira has little chance of winning a lawsuit. But who needs a favorable judgment when you have an army of lawyers that can intimidate the other side into backing down.
However, if Sequeira is successful, he could open up himself and the Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District to billions of dollars in “takings” claims. The lawyers make out coming and going.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/20/2020
1179 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.
Welcome to Flood Notes. So much has been happening lately on the flood front, it’s hard to keep up with it all. So this post will be a digest of things that affect flooding on the local, state and national fronts.
Humble ISD North Transportation Center Construction Update
We have had ideal construction weather in the last month and contractors at HISD’s north transportation center on Ford Road in Porter had made a lot of progress. They have completed the detention pond. More than half the remaining site is covered with concrete parking lots. And it looks as if the foundation for a building has also been poured. Humble ISD anticipates shorter routes for half the district will save taxpayers $2 million per year. The District hopes to open the Center in 2021.
Humble ISD North Transportation Center 11.7 acre site. Photo taken 11/07/2020.
Colony Ridge
This massive development in Liberty County has turned into the world’s largest trailer park. The developer of Colony Ridge keeps expanding at a record clip. Perhaps he’s anticipating a sales boom when the Grand Parkway creates better access. At the moment, he appears to be cutting and burning another 3000 acres. Nearby Plum Grove residents have complained about the smoke.
Colony Ridge expansion. Photo taken 11/1/2020.Colony Ridge expansion. Photo taken 11/1/2020.Colony Ridge expansion. Photo taken 11/1/2020 after a long period without rain. Notice the wet areas covered up with fill. Wetlands once criss-crossed this area.
Chlorine Creek
Plum Grove residents who live next to Colony Ridge also report the strong smell of sewage and chlorine coming from a new sewage treatment facility along Maple Branch a quarter to a half mile away. TCEQ fined the company that provides these services not long ago for the illegal discharge of 48,000 gallons of raw sewage into the same creek from a lift station.
Sewage treatment plant creating strong odors for Plum Grove residents as well as those in Colony Ridge itself.Wastewater from this plant is apparently discharged into Maple Branch just inside the tree line at the top of the frame.The discharged water has a heavy chlorine smell to it. All life in the creek seems to have died according to residents. That includes, fish, tadpoles, minnows, etc.
Michael Shrader, a Plum Grove resident who lives adjacent to Maple Branch, has affectionately renamed it Chlorine Creek.
HUD Approves New GLO Plans for Disaster Funding
On 11/4, Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush announced that the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) approved two state action plans detailing the distribution and eligible uses of more than $285 million. The Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funds will assist in long-term recovery efforts following severe flooding in 2018 and 2019 in South and Southeast Texas. To view the action plans, please visit recovery.texas.gov/action-plans. To expedite the recovery process, the GLO will directly administer and oversee the funds.
TWDB Accepting FEMA Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant Requests
This one affects government officials in Cities, Counties, Special Districts, etc.. FEMA’s Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) grant program provides federal funding to help communities pay for cost-effective ways to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to flood prone structures that are insured under the National Flood Insurance Program. FMA program funds can be used for planning and projects. The deadline to apply to the Texas Water Development Board is December 1, 2020. For more information, please visit www.twdb.texas.gov/flood/grant/fma.asp.
FEMA Program Helps Enforce Building Codes, Floodplain Management
FEMA announced the release of a policy to provide communities with resources to enforce building codes and floodplain management following a major disaster declaration. The “Building Code and Floodplain Management Administration and Enforcement” policy can provide funding for the first 180 days following a major declaration for:
Costs associated with extra hires or contracted support
Reviewing and processing building permits and occupancy and compliance certificates
Conducting building inspections and initial substantial damage field surveys
Reviewing disaster-related development in the floodplain
Providing educational services to the public on floodplain requirements.
The policy is a result of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018, Section 1206. This policy applies to all major disaster declarations declared on or after August 1, 2017.
CBS aired a chilling story tonight about the floods brought by Hurricane Eta. The storm dumped up to 7 inches of rain on the Carolinas. It washed out roads and bridges. In fact, a reporter was standing on one bridge when pieces of it started to fall into the raging floodwater. Very dramatic footage if you missed it.
Eta nearly tied Gordon for the longest hurricane on record. Jeff Lindner, Harris County Meteorologist, says that had the storm lasted until tomorrow, it would have taken the longevity record.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 11/12/2020
1171 Days since Hurricane Harvey
The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/20201101-DJI_0009.jpg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=19001200adminadmin2020-11-12 20:28:362020-11-12 20:29:28Flood Notes: Highlights of Current Happenings
This morning, at its October 1 board meeting, the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) announced the members of its regional flood planning groups. Back in April, the TWDB announced the formation of 15 flood-planning regions and started soliciting nominations for members in 12 categories for each region.
Members of San Jacinto Watershed Regional Flood Planning Group
In Region 6, the San Jacinto watershed, the 12 initial members will be:
According to the TWDB, the regional flood-planning groups (RFPGs) will meet as required to develop their own plans. They must:
Deliver the first regional flood plan no later than January 10, 2023
Adequately represent their associated interest group as it exists throughout the entire region
Consider all the region-wide stakeholders when making decisions
Commit to regularly attending their RFPG meetings
Understand and follow the state flood planning framework and process, as well as review the various materials that will be considered by the RFPG along the way
Solicit and consider stakeholder input in a transparent process
Participate in directing the work of technical consultants
Make decisions and recommendations regarding flood management goals and strategies and flood mitigation projects for their region
Ensure adoption of a regional flood plan that meets all requirements, including that no neighboring area may be negatively affected by an element of the regional flood plan
600 Nominees Considered
The TWDB selected RFPG members from more than 600 nominations. Several groups across the state will have smaller groups. TWDB either did not receive nominations or they could not find qualified candidates in some categories. For a complete list of members in all groups, see the last two pages of this agenda item from today’s TWDB meeting.
The TWDB will soon convene initial planning group meetings. All meetings will include opportunities for public input and will be open and transparent. Meeting notices will be posted to the TWDB’s Regional Flood Planning Group Meetings webpage. One of the many important considerations of the new flood planning groups will be the potential to include additional voting and/or non-voting members to the group.
Making Texas a Safer Place to Live
This is a significant step forward in making Texas a safer place to live. The distinguished members of the San Jacinto RFPG should represent the interests of this watershed capably. They have a little more than two years to formulate a plan. Game on.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/1/2020
1029 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Screen-Shot-2020-10-01-at-12.26.10-PM.png?fit=726%2C220&ssl=1220726adminadmin2020-10-01 12:27:172020-10-01 13:22:15TWDB Announces Members of New Regional Flood Planning Groups
Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) is trying to make flood-related information more accessible and user friendly via an update of their website, TexasFlood.org. The refreshed website will become a one-stop shop for flood-related data and information throughout the state. Please review it and then give TWDB your input via this short survey. Make sure they’re providing the kind of information YOU want.
In 2019, the Texas Legislature and Governor Abbott greatly expanded the Texas Water Development Board’s (TWDB) role in flood mapping, planning, and financing.
In addition to existing flood programs, TWDB will administer a new state and regional flood planning process, increase flood-related financial assistance, and advance flood modeling and mapping capacities.
As the agency expands data, information, and resources related to flooding in Texas, a key priority is to ensure that flood-related information is timely, user friendly, and easy to find.
TWDB
So judge the new website against those goals.
Purpose of Survey
The purpose of the survey is to understand:
What flood-related information you find most valuable
How best to present that information on the new version of the site.
Less Than Ten Minutes Will Help Texans Better Prepare for Next Flood
Until now, the TWDB web presence has largely been geared toward water professionals. This site however, targets ordinary citizens. It’s a fresh approach for the Board. The home page for instance, starts with a discussion of what to do before, during and after a flood. You can drill down from there.
The survey should only require 5 to 10 minutes. Hurry. The last day is September 8. So please take the survey today. Your help will benefit Texans for years to come.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/TexasFlood.org-Home-Page.jpg?fit=1500%2C955&ssl=19551500adminadmin2020-09-07 10:58:292020-09-07 11:01:27Texas Water Development Board Wants Input on Their New TexasFlood.org
SJRA has applied for a $375,000 grant from the Texas Water Development Board’s (TWDB) Flood Infrastructure Fund to study sedimentation in a six county area:
Liberty
Waller
Grimes
San Jacinto
Harris
Montgomery
The City’s of Conroe and Houston also support the effort.
Sedimentation Known to Limit Floodway Conveyance
Sedimentation in the Upper San Jacinto River Basin says the SJRA, “…is known to impact floodway conveyance capacity.”
SJRA Grant Application
In order to create a plan for implementing potential sediment solutions, this study will develop “sediment budgets” by evaluating the input, output, and storage of sediment for the entire basin, as well as for sub-watersheds within the basin.
Identifying Largest Problem Areas
This process will identify which sub-watersheds in the basin:
Produce the most sediment
Store the most sediment.
With this information, the SJRA says it can prioritize locations for improvements, mitigate loss of floodway conveyance, and develop best management practices. In regard to the latter, changes of regulations could be considered.
Much Has Changed Since Last Study
KBR conducted the last study on this issue in 1998. Since then, we’ve seen exponential growth of sand mining and development in this watershed. Both have the capacity to change conclusions from the KBR study. So a new study is highly warranted.
Confluence of Spring Creek and West Fork. TCEQ alleges that Liberty Mines discharged 56 million gallons of white waste water into the West Fork.
What’s Included in Study?
Specific tasks anticipated to be included in the scope of work include, but are not necessarily limited to:
Upper San Jacinto River Basin watershed characterization
Inventory of available existing data
Annual sediment output determination
Annual sediment storage determination
Sediment transport modeling
Individual sediment source or storage locations determination
Individual site investigations
Key stakeholder and permitting agency coordination
Development of conceptual solutions and overall implementation strategy
Development of Upper San Jacinto River Basin sediment management plan
If approved, the grant would also include development of cost estimates, preliminary exhibits, and preliminary permitting requirement evaluation.
All identified projects, efforts, and practices will be ranked and included in an implementation plan. Ultimately all information will be compiled into a regional sediment management plan, which can guide mitigation efforts in the future.
Building on Other Recent Efforts
The project will take advantage of data and tools developed recently as part of the San Jacinto Regional Watershed Master Drainage Plan project (SJRWMDP) now nearing completion.
Harris County Flood Control District (HCFCD) leads that project. It utilizes Atlas 14 rainfall. The project will also utilize data developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Harris County while dredging sediment from the mouth of Lake Houston.
SJRA feels the proposed project will increase benefits gained from state and federal dredging efforts which total approximately $125 million.
Finally, this project will also build on a sand trap development project currently being performed by SJRA in coordination with HCFCD along the West and East Forks of the San Jacinto River. SJRA already submitted a separate abridged application for the next phase of the sand trap development project.
FOUR YEARS to Complete!@#$%
SJRA anticipates that this study will take 4 years to complete! It says the work will only take 18 months or less, but budgeting uncertainties related to COVID-19 will delay the start of the project. With seven partners, the matching funds demanded from each would only about to about $50,000.
However, this delay, says the SJRA, will allow completion of the sand trap preliminary design study so that the SJRA can use that information as input for the sedimentation study.
While this grant application covers only planning and study, it will identify sedimentation solutions, and guide future sedimentation reduction projects, efforts, and practices.
Helping Preserve Water Storage Capacity in Lake Houston
Any sedimentation reduction activity in the Upper San Jacinto River Basin (Lake Houston watershed) should reduce the sediment load entering Lake Houston. That would help preserve volume for water storage. Lake Houston is the main water supply reservoir for approximately 2 million people.
Until SJRA identifies sedimentation solutions, it cannot quantify sedimentation reduction benefits. One of the main goals, however, would be to restore, maintain, or expand storm flow capacity, which could potentially remove structures from the floodplain.
Flood mitigation provided by these future projects/efforts/practices could benefit areas impacted by Hurricane Harvey and Tropical Storm Imelda as well as other major storms such as Hurricanes Ike and Rita, and storms in 1994, 1998, 2015, and 2016.
The only thing I don’t like about this study is the three year delay due to COVID. It’s already been three years since Harvey.
Of five recent grants that SJRA applied for, this is the only one that mentions such a delay.
If six counties, the Cities of Conroe and Houston, and the SJRA can’t come up with $50,000 each in matching funds, something’s seriously wrong. It would take more than that to repair ONE flooded home in each of those municipalities and counties. And that makes me wonder whether hidden hands are intentionally delaying this important study.
West Fork Sand Mine cited by TCEQ for unauthorized discharge of 56 million gallons of sediment-laden waste water into West Fork San Jacinto.
If you get in a helicopter and fly around for a day, it’s pretty obvious where the problems are.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/11/2020
1047 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200421-RJR_0898.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-07-11 13:38:322020-07-11 14:37:37Details of SJRA Grant Application for Upper River Basin Sedimentation Study
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?
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.
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.
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?
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Sand-Trap-Benefit-Area.jpg?fit=1200%2C1210&ssl=112101200adminadmin2020-07-09 15:26:042020-07-09 15:26:28Details of SJRA Application to TWDB for Grant to Develop Sand Traps
On June 15, the SJRA submitted an abridged application to the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB). The SJRA wants to develop a joint operations plan for Lake Houston and Lake Conroe reservoirs. The grant assumes that FEMA approves construction of additional gates for Lake Houston after completion of preliminary engineering in the second half of next year. The addition of gates could potentially make a pre-release strategy for Lake Houston more viable and that could be a game changer for operations of both dams.
If the floodgates on the Lake Houston spillway are upgraded to discharge as much water as Lake Conroe’s, there will be a definite need to rethink how these two dissimilar dams can work together.
The Flood Infrastructure Fund applications are a two-step process: Abridged Applications provide the TWDB with information needed to prioritize projects. Applicants whose projects rank within the program’s available capacity are invited to submit full financial-assistance applications at a later date. Those provide more detailed financial, legal, engineering, and other information. Once the full review process is complete, the TWDB will consider project funding.
The two stage process ensures:
Projects meet criteria before applicants invest the vast majority of their time and effort
TWDB has enough money to fund the most worthy projects
It’s much like getting a commitment letter from a bank before you fill out a full mortgage application.
Why Joint Operations Plan Needed
Widespread flooding in the Lake Houston Area during Hurricane Harvey underscored the need for a joint operations plan with Lake Conroe. Many downstream residents reported they thought the flood threat had passed. Then the SJRA opened its flood gates and started releasing up to 79,000 cubic feet per second. By itself, that would have been the 9th largest flood in West Fork history.
Those who flooded question the timing and volume of the release, and whether a pre-release strategy could have reduced downstream damage.
Once additional gates are in place at Lake Houston, says the SJRA in its application, a joint operations plan will benefit both water supply and flood mitigation.
Objective of Plan
The main goal of the plan is to determine:
The most efficient and safe operation of the two reservoirs…
… in series …
… by evaluating multiple individual components of operational strategy.
Components of Joint Plan
Informing Future Protocol for Lake Houston Gates
SJRA suggests that information and strategies developed as part of this effort could impact the development of CWA’s operating protocol for the future Lake Houston gates.
Joint Notification Protocol Development
The river authority also says that it is important that both reservoir operators develop joint notification protocols and public communication strategies. These must be consistent with the requirements of House Bill 26 passed during the 86th Texas Legislative Session. During Harvey, many downstream residents claim they received no warning of the SJRA release or the need to evacuate.
Forecasting Tools
Another major part of the grant covers forecasting tools. SJRA is currently developing a reservoir forecasting tool for Lake Conroe, funded partially via a grant from TWDB. It will predict lake levels and release rates from the Lake Conroe dam based on:
Weather forecasts
Observed rainfall
Lake levels
Other data.
A similar tool for Lake Houston could help synchronize forecasting for both reservoirs including the entire Lake Houston watershed (approximately 3,000 square miles). This could provide scientific data that governs pre-release at either reservoir and operations at Lake Houston.
Average Monthly Household Income in Project Scoring
Much of the application discusses demographics of the watershed. The TWDB scoring process gives preference to rural and low-to-moderate income areas. References to AMHI refer to Average Monthly Household Income. Unfortunately (for grant purposes), the AMHI for this watershed is 164% of the state average.
That limits the maximum amount of a grant to 50% of the project cost. A social vulnerability index also acts as a tie breaker.
Next Steps in Application Process
The TWDB is currently screening and prioritizing abridged applications for projects.
Before the end of the summer, TWDB will invite extended applications for the high priority projects.
Extended applications are due this Fall.
TWDB will begin making financial commitments this winter.
For the full text of the abridged grant application, click here.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/7/2020
1043 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200616-RJR_3280.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-07-07 19:49:402020-07-07 20:06:19Details of Proposed Lake Houston-Lake Conroe Reservoir Joint Operations Grant
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 atWoodridge 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.
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%.
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.
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
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/20200616-RJR_4383.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-07-03 11:55:542020-07-04 14:02:25City Applies for TWDB Grants to Turn Woodridge Village Into Detention Basin and More
On page 18 of the executive summary, there’s an overview of the recommendation. It requests that “… the State consider legislation clarifying the liability exposure of reservoir operators for passing storm flows through water supply reservoirs.”
Sounds innocent enough. However, the explanation for the recommendation on page 1,411 of the appendices is a little more ominous. I reprinted it verbatim below, but italicized some phrases for the discussion that follows.
Explanation for Recommendation
The explanation says, “Flood control reservoirs are generally drawn down at the beginning of the annual wet season so that when large rain events occur, the runoff may be captured and later released more slowly into the receiving stream. These reservoirs therefore reduce downstream flood levels and prevent inundation in low areas. In contrast, water supply reservoirs are operated to capture and retain as much stream flow as allowable under their permits in order to have supply available during periods of high demand.”
“This practice results in less available storage volume to capture runoff during major storms. When a major storm event occurs upstream or above a water supply reservoir, the reservoir operator must sometimes release flood flows during and after the event to prevent flooding upstream of the reservoir or to prevent damage to the dam and other facilities associated with the reservoir.
“Although this flood flow can contribute to downstream flooding, most reservoirs actually reduce the amount of flooding which could have occurred had the reservoir not been constructed.
“In recent years, plaintiffs with property in the downstream floodplains have brought multiple lawsuits against major water supply reservoir operators. Some recent court decisions have held the operators liable for damages to the downstream properties.
“If this trend is allowed to continue, it will increase insurance rates for these entities and will force operational changes to occur that may result in less available water supply for periods of need. The net effect to water users will be an increase in the cost of surface water throughout the state.”
During Harvey, the SJRA released more than 79,000 cubic feet per second from Lake Conroe.
Sounds Like SJRA
The SJRA has hammered these themes since Harvey.
The text of the explanation sounds as though it is paving the way for a declaration of legislative immunity for Water Authority actions during floods.
Concerns About Recommendation and Explanation
On the surface and in the abstract, the individual claims in the explanation sound reasonable. However, on deeper inspection, they contain logical fallacies, generalizations, false choices, contradictions and questionable assumptions.
The explanation draws a distinction between flood control and water supply reservoirs – as if we have a choice. This area is too flat to allow the construction of classical flood-control reservoirs, such as those described in the text. So our reservoirs must do double duty.
Their rationale only allows the possibility of releasing water during and after the event. It makes no mention of before.
“…most reservoirs actually reduce the amount of flooding…” Hmmm. Is this admitting that they do have a dual purpose? Flood prevention was one of the objectives in the SJRA’s enabling legislation.
“Some recent court decisions have held the operators liable for damages to the downstream properties.” Aren’t courts the proper venues for such decisions? How can the legislature possibly foresee the actions of every operator in response to every storm?
“If this trend continues…” What trend? Aren’t we talking about one event? Sounds like a plea for “legislative immunity” even if the recommendation itself doesn’t use those words.
“…force operational changes to occur that may result in less available water supply for periods of need.” True, but with proper controls in place, might they not also strike a balance between water supply and flood reduction?
“…increase the cost of surface water throughout the state.” If a court finds the actions of one operator deficient, how does that affect the insurance of every other operator in the state?
Real Question
No doubt, low lying properties were doomed to flooding during Harvey by the nature of the storm itself.
But did the SJRA have to open Lake Conroe’s gates when they did, as wide as they did, for as long as they did? Could an earlier, smaller, shorter release have avoided some of the flood damage?
I, for one, would feel much more comfortable having a judge answer questions like that after the fact rather than the having the legislature limit liability beforehand in a blanket fashion. Limiting liability also limits accountability.
Such recommendations buried in a statewide water plan on page 1,411 of an appendix show why the public REALLY DOES need to review this plan and give input.
Once approved in October, all recommendations will carry the weight of a state agency. The legislature rarely acts against such recommendations, especially when heavily lobbied behind the scenes. If you have the same concerns I do, the time to speak up is now.
How to Register Concerns about Water Plan
Here’s how to make your voice heard on this or any other issue in the Water Plan. You need to go through the SJRA.
The Region H Water Planning Group (RHWPG) will accept written comments until 5:00 p.m. June 28, 2020. Written comments should be provided to: Hon. Mark Evans, Chair, RHWPG c/o San Jacinto River Authority P.O. Box 329, Conroe, Texas 77305-0329
Written comments about the water plan without attachments also may be emailed to info@regionhwater.org. Comments will be documented in the summary of public comments in the 2021 Region H Water Plan.
Questions or requests for additional information may be submitted to: Jace Houston, General Manager, San Jacinto River Authority, P.O. Box 329, Conroe, TX 77305-0329, telephone 936-588-3111. The San Jacinto River Authority is the Administrator for the RHWPG.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 6/10/2020
1016 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/HumbleFloodFromHCFCD-e1761946748900.jpg?fit=1100%2C821&ssl=18211100adminadmin2020-06-09 21:15:482020-06-09 21:17:35Region H Water Plan May Ask Legislature To Clarify Potential Flood Liability of Dam Operators
