City's Flood Law Puts More Houses in Flood Zone

[Subdude]

The ordinance, adopted unanimously by the City Council on Aug. 30, 2006, affects almost 10,000 developed or vacant properties around the city, including nearly 2,400 single-family houses.

It has triggered at least five lawsuits in the past few months by Norcini and other property owners who say the city is essentially taking their property

[Guest danax]

Wow. It's good that the City is finally taking every step they can to lessen the potential for flood destruction but they need to compensate these folks fairly. I'm guessing the lawsuit will result in some type of just settlement.

I'm assuming the floodway is contiguous so the potential for new parkland is another municipal benefit......or elevated MetroRail?

[Ross]

If the floodway meant what everyone assumes it does, this would be a good law. Unfortunately, the floodway is just another part of the floodplain, and isn't really where water will flow during a flood event. The problem is further exacerbated by the method used to draw the floodway boundaries, which was a new computer program that was fed a bad model. One corner of my property ended up in the floodway, despite the fact that it's 5 feet above base flood elevation, and higher than anything on the other side of the bayou. If my house has water in it, there's a giant sheet of water all the way from 11th street to Galveston.

the Harris County Flood Control District is currently redoing the floodway boundaries in an effort to make them rational. the goal is to have the process completed and approved by FEMA some time in early 2008. Once that's complete, the floodway boundaries should look more like reality, and this will be a distant bad dream. The only winners, though, will be those folks who protested their property values and got them reduced by up to 90%. Their values can't go up more than 10% per year, so their taxes will stay low for a while.

[Original Timmy Chan's]

It's good to hear the floodways are being revised. I think there are a number of floodways in Harris County that need to be reviewed.

I was told that part of the problem was caused by FEMA...they told HCFCD and the TSARP contractors not to "optimize" the floodways. This is hearsay, but I was told by someone that would know, that FEMA gave instruction to only revise the floodways if they got bigger than the previous maps. If modeling indicated that the new floodways should have been smaller than the previous floodways, FEMA instructed TSARP/HCFCD to stick to the previous floodway width.

As far as those that own property that's currently in the floodway, I understand that the City of Houston is coming up with a variance process that will allow floodway properties to be developed, IF it can be shown that the development will cause no adverse impact to floodplain and/or floodway. Part of the solution will be pier and beam foundations, elevated above the 100-yr floodplain.

The problem with doing a detailed engineering analysis to show the impact of a single home is a problem of scale. Trying to determine the impact of one 30-foot wide home in a 3,000-foot wide floodway, you're not going to see much of an impact. 100 people can do individual studies showing that they have no impact, individually. Do one study showing the impact of 100 homes, and the answer will probably be different.

In any event...this is a case where the City of Houston tried to do the right thing for the watershed as a whole to reduce widespread flooding impacts, but neglected the ramifications to a few individuals that would be adversely impacted financially.

[Waterfall]

I read this article yesterday with some interest. I have worked on mapping the floodplains and floodways for Harris County and other cities, counties, etc., all around Texas. This is the core of what I do for a living. I know how floodways are mapped and determined and while I will not mention which areas I have specifically mapped, I will say that I am very familiar with White Oak Bayou.

The floodway mapping for White Oak has not changed dramatically between the old effective maps and the new effective maps that were produced from the Tropical Storm Allison Recovery Project (TSARP). What has changed is that due to the fact that the federal government has poured millions of dollars to help Harris County and the City of Houston with flood control efforts, they expect that the various municipalities take flood control more seriously. By definition, communities involved in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) are supposed to regulate development in the floodplain and not allow development in the floodway.

The floodway is the area of the floodplain that is supposed to be able to convey floodwaters downstream with a water surface elevation rise of 1.0 feet or less if the floodplain fringe is blocked. See this illustration: http://www.lawrenceutilities.org/wwrf/floodway_schematic.gif

As part of basic due diligence, a potential buyer of property should note the floodplain status of their property. This is especially true in a flood-prone community such as Harris County. I could speculate that many people have never checked the Flood Insurance Rate Map panel for their house or property. The man in this article clearly did not include a floodplain status check as part of his due diligence and wants to blame someone else. So basically, the he is blaming the City for following federal flood control mandates and does not want to accept responsibility for not checking the floodplain status of his property. I don't mean to come off as harsh, but sometimes it gets under my skin when it appears that people won't admit their mistakes and try to shove the blame onto others.

I realize that significant acerage within Harris County lies within floodway zones and by stricter enforcement of NFIP laws, development will be limited. However, I think that this enforcement will result in a greater good for the general public in terms of reduction of flood losses. I welcome everyone's questions and comments on this issue.

[Ross]

Waterfall, the floodway maps did change significantly for White Oak Bayou from the Loop to Shepherd. The floodway maps for the area were done poorly, and property that is 5 feet above base flood elevation was placed in the floodway on the north side of the bayou, while properties that were 1 foot above base flood elevation on the South side were not. The floodway as mapped makes absolutely no sense from 18th street to Shepherd. The map as drawn is physically impossible, as water will seek a level and not flow at an angle across the width of the channel. I've see the remap for the area from South of 11th to Shepherd, and the flodway is essentially insode the banks of the bayou except for one expansion on the East end of Hidden Lakes townhomes. I don't have an issue with the intent of the ordinance, but it was passed with no notice to the affected homeowners, and too late for homeowners to appeal the FEMA flod maps without spending a bunch of money on engineering studies. Kudos to teh Harris County Flood Control District for reopening the process and redoing the models.

[TheNiche]

Waterfall, I appreciate your post. However, I also appreciate the complaints of people who own property in the floodway responding to irrational regulation, whether it was voluntary at the municipal level or forced from the federal level.

And make no mistake about it: this is irrational regulation. 1) If people want to take the risk, let them, but exclude them from NFIP coverage, or 2) at least allow people to build if they mitigate their exposure to flooding by modifying the structure.

[Waterfall]

Waterfall, the floodway maps did change significantly for White Oak Bayou from the Loop to Shepherd. The floodway maps for the area were done poorly, and property that is 5 feet above base flood elevation was placed in the floodway on the north side of the bayou, while properties that were 1 foot above base flood elevation on the South side were not. The floodway as mapped makes absolutely no sense from 18th street to Shepherd. The map as drawn is physically impossible, as water will seek a level and not flow at an angle across the width of the channel. I've see the remap for the area from South of 11th to Shepherd, and the flodway is essentially insode the banks of the bayou except for one expansion on the East end of Hidden Lakes townhomes. I don't have an issue with the intent of the ordinance, but it was passed with no notice to the affected homeowners, and too late for homeowners to appeal the FEMA flod maps without spending a bunch of money on engineering studies. Kudos to teh Harris County Flood Control District for reopening the process and redoing the models.

I will try and post a comparison map of the before and after floodplain/floodways along White Oak for discussion purposes later today or tomorrow. We have them here at the office somewhere.

The ordinance has been on the books since the late 1970's, however, only recently has the City of Houston (as floodplain administrator for this area) decided to enforce it. And yes, the Harris County Flood Control District is already gearing up to re-map the White Oak Bayou floodway. There is a chance that I will be involved in this project, so I will keep the board posted.

The engineering studies (what I do) for re-mapping the floodway can be relatively expensive, but keep in mind that FEMA charges, at a minimum, $4,800 to review a submittal for re-mapping the floodway, so it is not all on the engineer.

[Waterfall]

Waterfall, I appreciate your post. However, I also appreciate the complaints of people who own property in the floodway responding to irrational regulation, whether it was voluntary at the municipal level or forced from the federal level.

And make no mistake about it: this is irrational regulation. 1) If people want to take the risk, let them, but exclude them from NFIP coverage, or 2) at least allow people to build if they mitigate their exposure to flooding by modifying the structure.

Thanks for your response. The regulation of floodplain areas can be considered irrational, but the overall intent is to reduce flood hazards for the community as a whole. I would speculate that the newly enforced ordinances are being enforced with the broad brush point of view. There seems to be evidence that the City did not anticipate the recent landowner reactions.

To respond to your second comment, as a member community of the National Flood Insurance Program, the City of Houston (and Harris County) cannot legally allow people to do what they want in the floodway and/or floodplain. If they did do that, they could lose their member status in the NFIP and then no one in the City (or County) could buy federally subsidized flood insurance. So, legally, they cannot just allow people to take the risk. The City will allow people to build in the floodplain (not the floodway) as long as they show that they mitigate impacts to water surface elevations and peak runoff rates.

[TheNiche]

Thanks for your response. The regulation of floodplain areas can be considered irrational, but the overall intent is to reduce flood hazards for the community as a whole. I would speculate that the newly enforced ordinances are being enforced with the broad brush point of view. There seems to be evidence that the City did not anticipate the recent landowner reactions.

To respond to your second comment, as a member community of the National Flood Insurance Program, the City of Houston (and Harris County) cannot legally allow people to do what they want in the floodway and/or floodplain. If they did do that, they could lose their member status in the NFIP and then no one in the City (or County) could buy federally subsidized flood insurance. So, legally, they cannot just allow people to take the risk. The City will allow people to build in the floodplain (not the floodway) as long as they show that they mitigate impacts to water surface elevations and peak runoff rates.

Yes, well it would seem that we both might be able to agree that the law is irrational and that, whether it would have to be changed at the local or federal level, certainly ought to be changed.

I greatly appreciate your posts. Please do keep us up to date.

[Waterfall]

I couldn't find the pictures that I thought I had, but I find a useful site.

Go here Efloodmap and you can see the before and after floodplain/floodway limits for all of Harris County. The site is best viewed with MS Internet Explorer.

I did find out that my firm is under contract to revise the floodway boundaries for White Oak Bayou. Others in my firm have already begun working on this project. If you have specific areas of concern, I can try, but will not promise, to give you updates on how the mapping is shaping up. Just let me know.

[TJones]

I'll raise my hand as one of the UPSET HOMEOWNERS ! My house has been in an "X" plain for almost 30 years. I would have never bought the house if it was IN a flood zone. I was lucky though and my insurance is only $590 a year. They were trying to get me for over $2000 a year, but I got grandfathered after some tedious work and research. I had to use flood maps from 1970 to show where my house was when it was built in 1979. Pain in the Wazoo, thanks COH, I ought to send YOU the bill !

[brerrabbit]

A friend of mine called me from Dallas the other day because he had read the article and thought it was ridiculous that the City would put exsisting structures that had been approved in the past into an area that was reclassified and therefore completely destroyed the value. I agree that its ridiculous that the City would enact such a law. Unfortunatly because of the development of Houston as well as other areas of the Gulf Coast and all across the country for that matter we have imbedded billions of dollars of value into real estate that should have never been built. Galveston is a perfect example. Development has spread the length of the entire island and the seawall does no protect the majority of the new developments. People are building five and six hundred thousand dollar houses in areas where technically nothing should be built. The only reason people are willing to do it is becasue they can receive highly subsidized insurance for those structures. Let the free market system work and make individuals who make bad decisions pay the actual cost of the insurance and overnight no one would build in these places. Now I am not suggesting that the current issue falls into that classification, and I think that houses that were built long ago when flooding was not an issue in an area should be given help with insurance and those areas should be grandfathered into regulations.

Unfortunatly, the system we have lived with for so long has allowed subsidies and now when ever a regulating body tries to right the wrongs of the past so to speak then people get upset and property values decrease.

[Urbannomad]

I understand the logic behind not allowing new construction in the floodway and I'm ok with that, but I don't agree with not allowing people to make repairs/renovations to existing structures so long as they do not increase the footprint of the structure. That seems like a logical comprise to me... I'm not an expert on the ordinance but it seems very unfair to existing homeowners/businesses already established in the neighborhood. One lot will have a brand new, expensive home on it but the adjacent lot sits vacant because the lot with the home was constructed just before this ordinance was enacted. And now the people who shelled out over 300K for it are sitting in a worthless house. Doesn't seem right to me.

My biggest concern though is what is going to happen to all of this "undesirable" land and the decaying buildings? Take for example the old drug store on TC Jester and 18th, it's currently used as a dumping ground and graffiti wall right now and no one is going to clean it up since the property is worthless as a result of this ordinance... is the city going to do something with all this land and these structures that the "market" will obviously not maintain since no one will buy them or can sell them? I'm worried that this could have a very negative impact on the whole neighborhood since we are still in a transitional phase and this area simply cannot be cleaned up. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I'm thankful that my home isn't in the floodway.