TWDB is the state agency responsible for water supply and flood planning, financing, and research. The agency helps ensure Texans plan and prepare for the perpetual threat of water scarcity and water surplus in Texas.
Water Newsroom Emphasizes Newsworthy Issues
The new website emphasizes news and timely topics. It bridges the gap between water professionals and consumers. It is a filtered, scaled-down, simplified version of the Board’s existing website, which can best be described as voluminous.
The Texas Water Newsroom was created to tell the stories of Texas water—the people, places, issues, and efforts. It contains videos, articles, press releases, and more. TWDB updates the stories regularly. All content is available for public use and reproduction for informational purposes. However, TWDB discourages promotional use.
The story on regional water plans in the Water Newsroom caught my eye. It talked about how sixteen regional water planning groups are putting the finishing touches on their plans to ensure their areas have enough water to survive a drought. It contained a link to the current drafts of the plans by region. Houston is in Region H.
I won’t pretend that I’ve read the whole thing. But I did skim it. And I found buried nuggets of information that revealed political/legal/private agendas in play.
That in itself is inevitable. But some are shocking. One in particular caught my eye: “Flood Liability of Water Supply Reservoirs.” It contains a legislative recommendation that has the potential to take away some of your rights.
More on that in a separate post. Suffice it for now to say that the TWDB really does need public input on these recommendations. And I probably would not have found that recommendation had it not been for the new website. Check it out. Bookmark it. And visit often.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Screen-Shot-2020-06-09-at-1.59.00-PM.png?fit=960%2C206&ssl=1206960adminadmin2020-06-09 15:43:352020-06-09 15:43:47Texas Water Development Board Launches New Web Site
On March 16, 2020, the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) finally started accepting applications for flood infrastructure projects under Senate Bill 7 signed by the Governor on June 13, 2019. We’re now at 941 days since Hurricane Harvey.
What Took So Long
What took so long?
Harvey happened shortly after the 2017 legislature concluded.
The Governor would immediately release money from the Rainy Day Fund.
The next legislature met in January of 2019.
It took until the end of May, 2019 for SB7 to work it’s way through the Senate and House.
The Governor signed the bill in June.
The bill stipulated that the fund had to be approved to voters in November 2019. It was.
With construction on many projects taking a year or more, the earliest citizens may see benefits from many of these grants will be 4 years post Harvey.
941 Days since Hurricane Harvey and 190 since Imelda
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Melinda-Ray-Harvey.jpg?fit=900%2C1200&ssl=11200900adminadmin2020-03-27 13:48:582020-03-27 13:49:21Texas Water Development Board Now Accepting Applications for Flood Infrastructure Fund Projects
Today, the Texas Water Development Board formally approved the $30 million grant that will extend the mouth bar dredging program started by the City of Houston last week. Approval had been expected, but in the often-delayed world of flood mitigation projects, the signed deal was a welcome relief. This means that mouth bar dredging can continue in a timely way before hurricane season starts.
Phase One will focus on the West Fork Mouth Bar using the City’s $6 million and $10 million from the grant.
Phase Two will focus on the East Fork Mouth Bar using the remaining $20 million from the grant.
The $10 million from the County flood bond will fund surveys, formulation of specs, bidding, project management and more.
Going Beyond Harvey Dredging
Since Harvey, dredging efforts have focused on identifying and removing deposits related strictly to Hurricane Harvey itself. See below.
Previous phases of dredging focused upstream of the fat blue area near the mouth bar.
Recently completed projects effectively removed sediment deposited by Hurricane Harvey; however, more dredging needs to be completed in the area farthest to the right. That will help restore conveyance and reduce flooding by removing a sediment dam behind the dam. It should also help improve lake capacity.
Additional details on dredging plans and progress reports should become available in the coming weeks. In the meantime, crews appeared to be busy assembling equipment today at the old docks used by the Army Corps.
Crews assembling braces on pontoon that will hold the spudpoles. The spudpoles will hold the pontoon in place while a mechanical excavator scoops sediment into waiting barges to ferry it back to the placement area.Photo taken 1/16/2020.
The City plans to kick off the program with mechanical dredging equipment because it can mobilize quickly. At some point, they may switch over to hydraulic dredging to take advantage of that technology’s greater efficiencies.
The Great Lakes Dredge from Phase 1 is still sitting at the Army Corps dock in pieces while new equipment mobilizes around it. Rumor has it that the Great Lakes dredge is for sale. Photo taken 1/16/2020.
Huberty has already started lobbying for additional funding to help with longer-term maintenance dredging.
Two More Steps Before Kicking Into High Gear
Late today, John Blount, Harris County Engineer who authored the grant request said that there are two more formalities before the program can kick into high gear.
Harris County Commissioners Court, which previously approved the grant request, must now also approve receipt of the award and sign an inter-local agreement with the City of Houston. The latter will govern the working relationship between the City and County. The next Commissioners Court meets on January 28.
The permit to use Berry Madden’s property as a placement area must be amended to accept mechanical dredging spoils, not just hydraulic.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 1/16/2020
870 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/20200116-RJR_6419.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2020-01-16 19:30:132020-01-16 19:50:27Texas Water Development Board Approves $30 Million Grant for Mouth Bar Dredging
Behind-the-scenes work for the next phase of dredging has already started. The City, County and State are working together on a $30 million grant application for submission this month. The legislature earmarked the money for dredging at the confluence of the San Jacinto and Lake Houston. However, the money must go through the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) to Harris County and then the Harris County Flood Control District.
Circuitous Route for Funding
The supplemental appropriations bill, SB500, that the legislature approved dictates the circuitous route for funding. See the exact text from SB500 below.
“Out of funds appropriated in Subsection (1), $30 million is dedicated to the Texas Water Development Board to provide a grant to Harris County for the purchase and operation of equipment to remove accumulated siltation and sediment deposits located at the confluence of the San Jacinto River and Lake Houston.”
DIY vs. Outsourcing
State Representative Dan Huberty, who authored the SB500 amendment, has worked closely with all parties involved to explore the most cost-effective and timely solutions. For instance, Flood Control explored how much it would cost to hire an outside company for dredging versus buying the equipment and doing it themselves. Said Huberty, “In my discussion with the TWDB last week, they have agreed we can buy equipment if we need to, which is the direction we are pushing for at this time.” However, that option would take longer to implement and the money must be spent within the current bi-annum – by law.
Long Term vs. Immediate Needs
Meanwhile, the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto have urgent, immediate dredging needs, too. So the partners could break the work up and pursue both DIY and outsourcing options.
Said Huberty, “I met with DRC (Disaster Recovery Corporation) a week ago. DRC has an ongoing contract with both the City and County for debris removal from Lake Houston and they are still removing debris from the lake. So they might be an option that would let us deploy faster.”
DRC is the parent company of Callan Marine, a subcontractor during the Army Corps’ Emergency West Fork Dredging project after Hurricane Harvey.
The dredges are gone but the pipe is not. The quarter-mile long sections of pipe used in the initial Emergency West Fork Dredging Project have been broken down into smaller sections for transport, but much of it remains on the West Fork.Photo taken 12/3/2019.
Additional Sources of Funding
Huberty also said that, “In addition to the $30 million, the Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner and Council Member Dave Martin committed last weekend to help us fund this in partnership with Harris County Flood Control.” The City committed approximately $6 million, according to Huberty.
The ever-growing mouth bar on the San Jacinto West Fork. Imelda wiped out many of the gains from the Corps’ supplemental dredging program that ended on Labor Day and removed 500,000 cubic yards. Photo taken on 12/3/2019.The growing mouth bar on the East Fork of the San Jacinto near the entrance to Luce Bayou and the Interbasin Transfer Project.The Inter-Basin Transfer canal empties into the lower reaches of Luce Bayou, which flows into the northeastern corner of Lake Houston, near the emerging mouth bar. The project costs $351 million and will provide water to the Northeast Purification Plant. Photo taken 12/3/2019.
“In addition,” says Huberty, “I spoke to the Governor’s staff this weekend. We still have money left over from Harvey debris removal. That’s approximately another $16 million. They told us we can spend the money on the river and lake, but not for other purposes. This will let us complete the mouth bar dredging and get mechanical dredging done in areas like Huffman and Atascocita. The scope of the project is expanding, which is very good news. We’ll be able to help more people.”
Smaller mouth bars have set up around the lake at the entrance to drainage ditches, like this one in Atascocita near Walden. Photo taken on 10/4/2019. Such blockages can force water up, out and over the banks into neighborhoods during large rains.
Next Step: Commissioners’ Court Needs to Approve Grant Request
The ball, at this moment, is in Flood Control’s court. Commissioners’ Court must approve all grant requests made by any part of the County. Says Huberty, “There will be an item on the December 17th Commissioners Court agenda requesting permission from the Court to submit the grant application to TWDB. All parties involved have already had discussions with the TWDB staff and are working on the grant application paperwork.”
Early next week Huberty plans to meet with John Blount, the Harris County Engineer; Stephen Costello, the Mayor’s Flood Czar; and John Sullivan, President of DRC.
Constant Dredging for Foreseeable Future
“In my discussions with all interested parties,” said Huberty, “we should have the application submitted by year end. We have been pushing to get it awarded quickly. It is a formality. We need to spend this money quickly which works to our advantage. We can always go back to the legislature for more after that.”
“All of these initiatives will ensure we can have constant, permanent dredging on the Lake for the foreseeable future,” said Huberty. “I am very pleased with the result and look forward to getting this project started.”
Posted By Bob Rehak on 12/4/2019
827 Days after Hurricane Harvey and 76 since Imelda
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Mouth-Bar-Upstream-Sml.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=18001200adminadmin2019-12-04 16:03:542020-01-17 10:17:50Plans For Next Phase of Dredging Announced
The San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) will hold an initial public meeting tomorrow night to discuss its Flood Forecasting and Reservoir Operations Tool project.
Date: Thursday, October 24, 2019
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Place: SJRA General and Administrative Building Board Room, 1577 Dam Site Road, Conroe, Texas, 77304
Objectives of Forecasting Tool
The SJRA hopes to develop a tool that can:
Predict peak release rates of storm water from Lake Conroe
Anticipate peak water levels in Lake Conroe during rainfall events based on weather forecasts, observed rainfall, lake levels, and other data
Improve communication with Offices of Emergency Management and the public during storms.
Need for Faster, Better Information
“Getting information out as early as possible is essential during potential floods,” said Chuck Gilman, Director of Water Resources and Flood Management for the SJRA.
“The Flood Forecasting and Reservoir Operations Tool will take data from across the region and analyze it utilizing a model of the Lake Conroe Watershed to make predictions regarding flood threats. That will help us provide timely, accurate information for people to make decisions to protect themselves, their families, and property,” he added.
The gates at Lake Conroe can release water at up too 150,000 CFS. During Harvey they released almost 80,000 CFS.
During Hurricane Harvey, many people lost vehicles and valuables that could easily have been saved by driving them to higher ground if they had had more warning time. This project should help with that.
Available by Fall 2020
The Project will complete in fall 2020. A written technical memorandum will summarize recommendations for the tool.
The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) and SJRA will jointly fund the project. TWDB offers grants to political subdivisions in Texas for evaluation of structural and nonstructural solutions to flooding problems and flood protection planning.
To Offer Input
Anyone interested may attend the meeting to express their views with respect to the project.
Questions or requests for additional information may be directed to:
Matt Barrett, P.E.
Division Engineer
SJRA
1577 Dam Site Road
Conroe, Texas 77304
Telephone (936) 588-3111
If you plan to speak, contact Matt Barrett either in writing or by telephone in advance of the meeting. If you cannot attend but have views you would like to share, contact Barrett today.
For additional information on SJRA, visit www.sjra.net.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/23/2019
785 Days after Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/LC-Dam-e1719277556742.jpg?fit=1200%2C549&ssl=15491200adminadmin2019-10-23 12:44:372019-10-23 16:18:51SJRA To Hold Meeting Thursday at 6 p.m. To Discuss New Flood Forecasting Tool
ReduceFlooding.com has obtained a copy of the study withheld by the Army Corps that the Corps used to justify dredging only 500,000 cubic yards from the mouth bar of the San Jacinto West Fork. The Corps refused to supply it in response to my Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in June. However, the City of Houston did supply the Corps document in response to a similar FOIA request. Now, thanks to Council Member Dave Martin, the public has an opportunity to compare the two studies side by side for the first time.
Kings River resident near mouth bar wading in knee deep water almost to West Fork channel marker. Caution: do not let children attempt this. Pockets of deeper water may exist that could cause drowning. Picture taken eight days ago. The island being excavated in the distance has since been removed; see last image in post.
After reviewing the Corps document, I can see why the Corps refused to supply it. It has more holes in it than a West Texas stop sign.
History of Controversy
For almost a year, the City and the Army Corps have argued over how much sediment was deposited in the mouth bar of the San Jacinto river by Hurricane Harvey. That determines how much dredging FEMA will fund. Initially, the City recommended working with two Texas Water Development Board sedimentation surveys conducted in 2011 and 2018. But no measurements exist from the period immediately BEFORE Harvey – only AFTER. So the Corps rejected that idea.
The Stockton Protocol combines ultra-high-resolution CHIRP seismic data with core sampling. The seismic identifies layer thickness and the core sampling identifies layer composition. (Note: the process is somewhat like the oil field practice of confirming seismic with core samples from exploratory wells.) The hope: that by analyzing changes in sediment composition (such as color, grain size, roundness, hardness, etc.), researchers can differentiate Harvey sediment from other floods and then measure it accurately.
Core sample from Tetra Tech Study. Different colors and consistencies indicate sediment came from different floods.
The Army Corps recommended a Texas A&M Galveston professor, Dr. Timothy Dellapenna, to do the research. However, the City of Houston and A&M could not agree on contract terms. Therefore, the City hired Tetra Tech, to perform the research that Dr. Dellapena outlined.
At the end of the day, even with 500,000 cubic yards, those two estimates still vary by almost 3X. According to Houston City Council Member Dave Martin, the Corps never explained why they rejected the Tetra Tech analysis.
The Corps simply accepted its own results and started dredging without public explanation or input. The Corps document raises many questions that may or may not have valid answers.
The USGS gauge used by the Corps for its analysis stopped working during the peak of Harveywhen most sediment would have been moving. The Corps report did not acknowledge this.
Corps Analysis Requires Explanations Never Supplied
Why did the Corps:
Base its analysis on a gage at US59 that stopped functioning during the peak of Harvey, when most sediment was moving?
Assume Harvey distributed sediment in the same patterns over the same distances as lesser storms?
Ignore build up of sediment from Tax Day and Memorial Day storms at the mouth bar as a factor that could have increased the percentage of sediment falling out of suspension during Harvey?
Not consider bank erosion downstream from the gage, relying instead on standard charts for “bed-load transport” for sandy rivers?
Ignore approximately 20 square miles of sand mines in the West Fork floodway where loose sand and silt were inundated by 131,000 cubic feet of water per second, unlike previous storms?
Use a 1-D instead of a 2- or 3-D model for this complex environment?
Not publicly disclose model inputs/outputs and data for peer review and validation?
Initially reject the use of two TWDB surveys, then reverse course and base all of their findings on them – without explaining why?
Exclude extreme data from their study, even though Harvey was one of the most extreme rainfall events in U.S. history?
Mislabel all charts, graphs and photos in its report?
Refuse to disclose their report in response to a FOIA request, contrary to official Army policy?
Omit the organization’s name and the author’s name from the report?
Treat the volume that Tetra Tech found related to Harvey in the mouth bar area alone as if it represented the total volume deposited in the entire West Fork by Harvey?
Corps Rejects Use of TWDB Surveys, Then Bases Own Analysis On Them
To estimate Harvey-related volume, the City initially proposed analyzing two Texas Water Development Board sedimentation surveys from 2011 and 2018.
The Corps rejected that idea, suggested the Stockton Protocol, rejected those findings, then based its own analysis on the two TWDB surveys it rejected earlier. This is like following a Three-Card Monte game!
Basically, the Corps tried to estimate the amount of sediment that Harvey’s flow could theoretically carry. That would depend on velocity and sediment size/weight. But the gage at US 59 stopped recording at the peak of Harvey. So they also had to estimate the discharge (volume of flow in cubic feet per second [cfs]). Then they used industry-standard curves to estimate sediment transport based on estimated discharge. But they discarded rates over 45,000 CFS because they produced unexpectedly high values.
They also ignored the presence of mile-wide sand mines upstream. The river ruptured the dikes of those mines and captured the pits during Harvey.
West Fork Sand Mine Complex inundated by Harvey. This reach of the river is normally about 150 feet wide.On this day, the day AFTER Harvey’s peak, the flow was more than a mile wide.
When the industry-standard sediment transport curves yielded unacceptably high results, the Corps resorted to a simple 1-D model (developed earlier for another purpose) to calculate the sediment load, because flows beyond 45,000 cubic feet per second “produced sediment loads far beyond a reasonable range.”
Corps Assumes Harvey Transported Same Percentage To Mouth Bar as Other Storms
One potentially fatal assumption: The Corps assumes that Harvey transported the same percentage of its sediment load to the mouth bar as all other storms between 2011 and 2018. Said another way, they assume that Harvey behaved LIKE all other storms. Yet not all those floods inundated sand mines.
Moreover, had the Corps measured river bank erosion at intervals between 2011 and 2018, they would have found that virtually all of it occurred during Harvey and very little occurred during Tax Day, Memorial Day and other storms.
Quantum Leap in Erosion Not Factored In
Harvey’s erosive power was NOT proportional to other storms, as the photos below show. River banks eroded more than a hundred feet during Harvey in many places. Yet the Corps report never even mentions erosion.
In 2011, the distance from the ridgeline of this home on Riverbend Drive to the West Fork was 326 feet.
On 1/23/2017, after the Tax and Memorial Day Floods, the distance had decreased only 2 feet.
This shows how much shoreline Harvey ALONE eroded. The yellow line is exactly the same length as after the 2016 floods.
After Harvey, the new distance to the river bank was 216 feet – 108 feet less.
The Tax and Memorial Day Floods combined eroded this river bank by 2 feet. Harvey alone eroded it another 108 feet – 50 times more!
Photographic analysis shows similar quantum leaps in erosion related to Harvey elsewhere along the West Fork.
Another home west of River Grove Park lost 27 feet between 2011 and early 2017, but 111 feet in Harvey.
River Grove Park lost 0 feet from 2011 to early 2017, but 74-feet in Harvey.
Romerica lost 62 feet between 2011 and early 2017, but 144 feet in Harvey.
Net: In four days, Harvey eroded from 2X to 75X more sediment than all other storms during the previous six years. It did NOT act proportionally.
The shearing force of 240,000 cubic feet per second coming down the West Fork literally pulled thousands of trees out by their roots and dislodged sediment disproportionately compared to previous floods (see below). The Gallery page of this web site clearly shows the extent of this devastation. It contains 450 images taken from a helicopter on 9/14/2017, two weeks after Harvey.
Hurricane Harvey ripped trees out by their roots to a degree that previous storms did not. This increased erosion exponentially compared to other storms.
Corps Assumes Mouth Bar Growth Did Not Affect Percentage Deposited by Harvey
The Army Corps also assumes that Harvey transported the same fraction of the total sediment load (20%) to the mouth bar that all storms did between 2011 and 2018. That’s a dubious assumption for several reasons:
Previous storms progressively built a wall across the mouth of the West Fork that grew higher and higher during the study period.
As it grew, that wall increasingly slowed water down and likely accelerated the rate of deposition behind it (which helps explain why the Corps had to dredge its way to the mouth bar).
This constant 20% contradicts numerous anecdotal reports from lakeside residents and boaters claiming that Harvey carried vastlymore sediment to the mouth bar (and their yards/docks) than previous storms. The wife of the resident wading across the river in the image above told me that, on a scale of 1 to 5, the Tax and Memorial Days floods deposited sediment in her yard equal to a 1. But Harvey, she said, was a 6. In other words, off the scale.
No wonder the Corps didn’t want the public looking at this!
Taxpayers Deserve Independent Scientific Review
Professionals rarely like to have their conclusions questioned. However, those who have confidence in their conclusions welcome peer and public review. They encourage second opinions and provide all of their data for review. They also welcome the opportunity to explain and defend their results. None of those things happened in this case.
Instead, the Corps concealed its results as if this involved national security, not public safety. Why? That may be the biggest question of all associated with this project.
The Corps has an excellent, hard-earned reputation. This study undermines it.
As mentioned above, the Tetra Tech study may also have flaws, but the Corps never revealed what its concerns were.
Only one thing is certain. Public safety rests on wildly differing studies. Taxpayers deserve an independent scientific review to resolve the differences between these two studies. The City concurs with the findings in this post and also calls for an independent scientific review. The Corps could not be reached for comment; their new public affairs officer does not list her phone number.
Dredging will likely end next week, with the Corps proclaiming it has restored the conveyance of the river to pre-Harvey conditions (when they have no pre-Harvey measurements).
So we need an independent scientific review to happen quickly. Email you Congressmen and Senators immediately.
Corps Plans Still Being Kept from Public
The Corps still has not released its dredging plans, despite a FOIA request made in June when mouth bar dredging started.
If that is an accurate assessment, the Corps would leave a sediment wall under the water approximately 30-35 feet high and 1-2 miles long in the mouth of the West Fork.
Congressman Dan Crenshaw reviews progress of dredging operation on Friday, August 16. Looking southwest towards Atascocita. Notice how the small island in the first image above has now been removed. The mouth bar itself will remain in place, most of it underwater nowwhere it is invisible to the public.
Others Scrambling to Pick Up the Pieces
It may look like the Corps has dredged. But it also looks like the Corps will leave 80-90% of the mouth bar in place. Remember, sand bars are like ice bergs in the sense that what you see above water is small compared to the amount you can’t see below water.
At this point, City, County, State and Federal leaders are scrambling to put together a plan to address the rest of the sediment. Some of that sediment is clearly pre-Harvey. I will discuss options for removal of that portion and maintenance dredging in a future post.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 8/20/2019
721 Days after Hurricane Harvey
As in previous posts on this subject, I promise the Corps that I will print their rebuttal verbatim if they disagree with any of the points in this post.
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/USGS.08069500.140334.00065..20170829.20170830..0..pres_.gif.png?fit=580%2C430&ssl=1430580adminadmin2019-08-20 16:14:592019-08-21 11:07:08Recently Obtained Documents Raise Questions about Amount of Sediment in Mouth Bar Due to Harvey
The 86th Texas Legislature charged the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) with implementing flood-related legislation, including Senate Bill (SB) 7, SB 8, SB 500, and House Joint Resolution 4. This legislation greatly expanded the TWDB’s role in flood planning and financing.
Planning the New State Flood Plan
The TWDB will administer a new state flood planning program. This program establishes a state and regional flood planning process, with flood planning regions based on river basins. The TWDB aims to have the first regional flood plans by 2023, and the first state flood plan by September 1, 2024.
Light pole near River Bend in North Shore as Harvey receded. Note the “wet marks” several feet up on pole. Photo by Jim Balcom.
The legislature also authorized a one-time transfer of $793 million from the state’s Economic Stabilization or “Rainy Day” Fund to create a new flood mitigation funding program that the TWDB will administer. The goal: to make drainage and flood projects more affordable and to meet immediate needs for funding. The funding will become available in 2020.
Statewide Call for Input
Says Jeff Walker, Executive Director, “The TWDB is working to get these programs up and running as quickly as possible and to hire staff for these new roles. Prior to formal rulemaking activities this fall, we are seeking input on a variety of issues, including but not limited to:
Administration of funding for flood control planning and drainage, flood mitigation, and flood control projects
Creation of regional and state flood planning process and related requirements
Potential flood planning region boundaries
State and regional flood planning guidance principles”
Written feedback is requested by August 30, 2019 and should be submitted to rulescomments@twdb.texas.gov.
Issues Being Considered
TWDB will also host stakeholder workshops around the state the first two weeks of August; these will include presentations on implementation efforts and issues for stakeholder consideration as well as opportunities for giving formal comments and for informal discussions with TWDB staff and board members.
TWDB invites you to join these discussions. In the coming months, you can help create new state programs that will better protect Texans against the loss of life and property from flooding.
What will be the most effective form of financial assistance? Grants or loans?
Should they require local matches?
What types of projects should get the highest priority?
Should state funds complement federal buyout funds?
How can the TDWB ensure cooperation of all political entities in a watershed?
How can we avoid conflicts between state and regional flood plans?
How can we ensure that flood mitigation measures in one area don’t exacerbate flooding in another?
Regional Workshop in Tomball on August 9
The information included in the PDF linked above is intended to generate discussion and to solicit specific feedback that will inform formal rulemaking and other implementation efforts.
Written feedback is requested by August 30, 2019 and should be submitted to rulescomments@twdb.texas.gov.
If you have thoughts you would like to volunteer on these or other planning issues, you can also discuss them in person at:
Beckendorf Conference Center at Lone Star College–Tomball
30555 Tomball Pkwy.
Tomball, TX 77375
9:30-11:30 a.m.
Friday, August 9
Sign up for more information about these meetings and other flood information at the TWDB’s website. You can also contact the TWDB at (512) 463-8725 or flood@twdb.texas.gov.
Posted by Bob Rehak on 7/30/2019with photo by Jim Balcom
700 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/image4-1-e1553198926707.jpeg?fit=966%2C1400&ssl=11400966adminadmin2019-07-30 21:30:132019-07-30 21:40:18Flood Planning: How Would You Spend $793 million?
Last weekend, I posted about a statewide flood assessment by the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) that will help shape public policy toward flooding. After reading the report, I became concerned by the lack of a serious discussion about the role of sedimentation in flooding. So I urged readers to send feedback before Wednesday at 5pm – the close of public comment.
If you haven’t had time to read the report yet…
Consider sending an adaptation of the email below.
First, thank you for an excellent report. I support all of your findings, but am concerned about one critical omission: sedimentation.
I live n the Humble/Kingwood/Lake Houston area. Sedimentation was and still is a major contributing factor to flooding here. The Army Corps of Engineers agrees. As a result, as taxpayers, we’re about to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on dredging. It could take a year or more to unclog our river and drainage ditches.
Here’s an example of a sand bar that largely formed during Harvey, blocks the San Jacinto West Fork where it meets Lake Houston. This giant bar elevated flood levels throughout the highly populated Humble/Kingwood corridor where more than 3300 businesses and 16,000 homes were damaged or destroyed.
Sadly, a large part of the sediment we received during Harvey was preventable. It came from sand mines upstream from us on both the East and West Forks of the San Jacinto. While this sand didn’t cause the flood, it exacerbated the flood.
Moving sand mines out of the floodway would be a simple way to reduce sedimentation and flood risk. Many states have minimum setback requirements in their permitting procedures and best practice guides. Texas has no such requirement. Neither does Texas require sand mines to:
Reclaim land when a mine is played out.
Slope banks to reduce erosion and strengthen dikes.
Avoid clearing land until it is ready to mine.
Post performance bonds to cover the cost of damage they cause.
Simply observing common-sense best management practices used in other states and countries could radically reduce the sediment escaping from sand mines during floods.
Additionally, I would point out that some counties (like Montgomery) may unwittingly encourage sand mining by giving miners timber exemptions on their real estate tax that they don’t qualify for.
For instance, one Montgomery County mine on the East Fork pays $288 a year in tax on 218 acres! All because of a timber exemption that hasn’t been valid for more than a decade!
It’s a pattern. In 53 out of 53 Montgomery County sand mine properties the ReduceFlooding.com examined, not one was appraised as a sand mine! More than 90% were appraised as vacant land or ag/timber even though they were not vacant and they had no trees. So, my suggestions are to:
Recognize the contribution of sedimentation to flooding
Document sources of sedimentation
Encourage legislation that reduces sedimentation from the sources we can control.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
(Your Name and contact info)
Posted by Bob Rehak on 10/2/2018
399 Days since Hurricane Harvey
https://i0.wp.com/reduceflooding.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/15.NewSandBarAtEntrytoLkHouston.jpg?fit=2000%2C1333&ssl=113332000adminadmin2018-10-02 17:09:022018-10-02 18:30:14Have You Given Feedback Yet to TWDB on State Flood Assessment?
