Comments delivered by Evelyn L. Merz, Conservation Chair,on behalf of the Houston Regional Group Sierra Club at the public hearing held by the Texas House Committee on Natural Resources
Wednesday, October 4, 2017
George R. Brown Convention Center, Houston

In 2011, the Houston Sierra Club sued the U.S, Army Corps of Engineers over its approval of a permit to proceed with the construction of Segment E of the Grand Parkway.  In part, that lawsuit was brought because the Corps had not adequately considered the effect of runoff from secondary development in the Addicks watershed, which would follow road construction.  This runoff would subsequently flow into the Buffalo Bayou watershed.  Additional runoff affects the safety of the Addicks Dam.  It was known that the runoff would flow behind the dam.  This was of concern because a Freedom of Information Act request revealed a 2010 Corps study that classified Addicks and Barker Dams’ safety risk as “urgent and compelling”.  Dealing with additional runoff would mean either further inundating the development on the west side of the dam or increasing the water released downstream.  Neither is a good choice and the Corps is faced with the need to protect the dam. 

The dams, both built just after World War II, are not operating as originally designed.  Structures on the immediate west side of Addicks are built on land that should have been acquired as part of the dam pool, but Congress did not appropriate the funds.  

This means that not only buyouts, but additional detention, and emphasis on providing vegetated permeable greenspace that can slow runoff are needed to lessen the impacts of major rainfall events.  These requirements are applicable to every watershed, not just the Buffalo Bayou watershed.  

Buyouts should be prioritized not only for those properties vulnerable to flooding, but by their locations to allow provision of additional detention.  The decision of an owner to sell under a voluntary buyout program is partially determined by whether the owner can obtain a permit to re-build and the affordability of flood insurance.  The issuance of permits should be carefully considered, particularly the elevation requirements for structures that have flooded.  In some areas, the requirement that structures be elevated 12 or 18 inches above the base flood elevation is not adequate.  Adequate future protection could require be re-built several feet higher.  It is also important that when elevating a structure, that fill is NOT brought in which would simply displace water.

And when we’re planning for detention, calculating capacity, and estimating impervious surface – the questions are:  What storm are we preparing for and what part of the floodplain are we willing or able to afford to protect?  Climate change and sea level rise must be a part of the planning.