DOCSLIB.ORG

Rainfall Depths and Intensities in Harris County (Revised 05/31/2019)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rainfall Depths and Intensities in Harris County (Revised 05/31/2019) Recommendation for: Rainfall Depths and Intensities in Harris County (Revised 05/31/2019) Goal: To determine how to apply NOAA Atlas 14 1 rainfall to replace the standard rainfall amounts for Harris County from the U.S. Geological Survey. 2 This will serve Harris County for all future analysis and design. Recommended Procedure: It is recommended that NOAA Atlas 14 rainfall data be used across Harris County. As a result, it is further recommended Harris County be divided into three hydrologic regions. 3 Table 1 identifies each region by watershed and the recommended 1% AEP 24-hour rainfall from Atlas 14. Figure 2 provides a map of the three regions. Table 1: 3-Region (1% AEP/24-Hour) Depth Region Watersheds (inches) Spring Creek, Willow Creek, Little Cypress Creek, Cypress 1 16.3 Creek, Addicks Reservoir, Barker Reservoir Luce Bayou, San Jacinto River (U/S L.Houston), Greens 2 Bayou, Hunting Bayou, White Oak Bayou, Buffalo Bayou, 16.9 Brays Bayou, Sims Bayou Cedar Bayou, Jackson Bayou, Goose Creek & Spring Gully, San Jacinto River (D/S of L.Houston), Carpenters Bayou, 3 18.0 Vince Bayou, Galveston Bay Tribs, Armand Bayou, Clear Creek Assumptions: It is assumed that the NOAA Atlas 14 data is representative of rainfall across Harris County and supersedes previous data associated with TP-40 (published by the U.S. Weather Bureau in 1961), Hydro-35 (published by NOAA in 1977), WRIR 98-4044 (published by the USGS in 1998), and SIR 2004-5041 (published by the USGS in 2004). Testing Procedure: Atlas 14 is provided online and in a gridded format. This allows the user to identify various depth-duration-frequency data for specific locations. However, this would be cumbersome for HCFCD to use for the MAAPnext Study and for other agencies (Harris County, City of Houston, etc.) to administer in their floodplain management programs. Therefore, an effort was undertaken to determine whether rainfall regions could be established across Harris County with representative rainfall amounts for each region, similar to current criteria. The following approach was used to identify various regions. 1. Map Partial Duration Series rainfall contours (isohyets) across the county for the 50%, 10%, and 1% AEP/24-hour storms against the centroid of each watershed to determine the rainfall depths from the isohyets that cross each centroid. 1 https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_map_cont.html?bkmrk=tx 2 Asquith, W.H., Depth-Duration Frequency of Precipitation for Texas (Water-Resources Investigation Report 98-4044), U.S. Geological Survey, Austin, Texas 1998. 3 Note that this configuration is slightly different than TSARP recommendations as the Sims Bayou watershed has been moved to Region 2. 2. Using the gridded data for the 50%, 10%, and 1% AEP/24-hour storms directly, determine the weighted average rainfall totals for each watershed and each storm. 3. Compare the results of Step #1 and #2 above (see example in Figure 1; note that first/top number listed is based on the isohyets and the second number, labeled “Wtrshd Avg” is based on the weighted average from the gridded data). Figure 1: 1% AEP/24-Hour Rainfall Totals (Isohyets vs. Weighted Avg. from Grids) 4. Determine if certain watersheds can be combined together to define regions where the rainfall is generally consistent among watersheds in each region. 5. Use the isohyet method (based on the centroid of the region) or the gridded method (based on the weighted rainfall of the region) to determine the representative rainfall amounts for an entire region. 6. Compare differences in rainfall depth between each watershed and its representative region. 7. Determine the latitude and longitude of the centroid of each region. 8. Input the latitude and longitude into NOAA Atlas 14 to determine the final Partial Duration Series depth- duration-frequency data for each location. Test Results: From Step #3 above, it was determined that rainfall results were nearly identical, whether estimated from isohyets passing through the centroid or based on weighted averages from gridded data. From Steps #4, #5, and #6, it was determined that three hydrologic regions (as described in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 2 ) would be best representative of the NOAA Atlas 14 rainfall across Harris County. Under this grouping, the difference between weighted average rainfall for each watershed and the given region within which a watershed is located not more than 0.6 inches. In addition, the difference between each region is not more than 1.1 inches. Figure 2: Harris County Hydrologic Regions Spring Creek San Jacinto River Luce (u/s of L. Houston) Bayou Willow Creek Little Cypress Creek Cypress Cree k 2 Jackson 1 Bayou Greens Bayou Addicks Cedar Bayou Reservoir White Oak Bayou Hunting Carpenters Bayou Bayou Goose Creek Barker Buffalo Bayou & Spring Gully Reservoir San Jacinto River (d/s of L. Houston) Vince Brays Bayou Bayou Sims Bayou Armand Galveston Bayou Bay Tribs Clear Creek 3 From Steps #7 and #8, Table 2 provides coordinates used for the centroid of each region for input into NOAA Atlas 14 to determine final Partial Duration Series depth-duration-frequency data. Table 2: Centroid Coordinates by Region Region Latitude Longitude 1 30.02745567 -95.72049946 2 29.92937387 -95.33891697 3 29.74077711 -95.09958119 Exhibits 1 through 3 provide the final depth-duration-frequency and intensity-duration-frequency data 4 for each region across Harris County (please note that the regions refer to those regions identified in Figure 2 ). 4 Please note that for consistency purposes the intensity-duration-frequency data was derived from the depth-duration-frequency, and not taken directly from NOAA Atlas 14. Therefore, numbers in the intensity-duration-frequency tables may vary slightly from those published in Atlas 14. Final Notes: Use of Partial Duration vs. Annual Maximum Series MAAPnext is driving the use of consistent rainfall across varying agencies within Harris County and its incorporated areas. As a result, there is a need to define depth-duration-frequency values in such a way that they are useful not only for floodplain management purposes, but also for drainage design and analysis of smaller storm water systems. For consistency purposes, it is necessary to define depth-duration-frequency data in terms of either Partial Duration Series or Annual Maximum Series. Annual Maximum Series data has been used by HCFCD since at least the Tropical Storm Allison Recovery Project (TSARP, 2001 to 2007). However, questions have been raised related to the appropriate use of each dataset. Literature research on Partial Duration Series (PDS) and Annual Maximum Series (AMS) was undertaken to determine if some clarity could be provided on the use of one type of series over the other. [It was noted during the research that certain terms add to the confusion. For example, the term “annual maximum exceedance” refers to PDS where there are the same number of values in the dataset as there are years in the period of record; this is not the same as AMS.] The following information outlines the findings of this research. • The following references were searched. There are many other textbooks available that discuss this topic, but these authors provide a reasonable sample of experts in hydrology who have addressed the issue. o Flood Frequency Analysis by Rao and Hamed o Introduction to Hydrology by Viessman, Knapp, Lewis, and Harbaugh o Hydrology for Engineers by Linsley, Kohler, and Paulhus o Statistical Methods in Hydrology by Haan o Applied Hydrology by Chow, Maidment, and Mays • Most of the textbooks use flood frequency (not rainfall frequency) to discuss PDS vs. AMS. However, since MAAPnext (and in general, all hydrologic/hydraulic modeling) is creating flows from rainfall, the discussion should still apply. • Use of both PDS and AMS have disadvantages. o The disadvantage of AMS is that the rainfall/flood dataset contains only the highest annual rainfall/flood for a given year. In other words, there may be peak rainfall/flood events that occur within a given year that are not the highest, but may be higher than the highest peak of other years. o The disadvantage of PDS is that the rainfall/flood dataset contains all peaks above a certain threshold (hence, “partial”). However, it is difficult to establish statistical independence with such a dataset, particularly among floods. It might also be suggested (though this assumption could be incorrect) that this is true of PDS for rainfall, not because it is difficult to establish independence of rainfall events, but because the independence of a resulting flood which is being calculated from PDS rainfall is difficult to determine. o At events greater than a 10-year (10% AEP), the difference between PDS and AMS flood/rainfall estimates are approximately the same. The difference between the two methods (PDS yielding greater rainfall depths) is 12% for the 2-year (50% AEP), 4% for the 5-year (20% AEP), and 1% for the 10-year (10% AEP). • The following quotes were noted in the research. Again, all are related to flood probability, not necessarily to rainfall. o Linsley, et al (Page 359): “If the analysis is concerned with probabilities less than 0.5 [understood to mean events greater than a 50% AEP] a data series of annual floods, the largest event in each year, is the best choice. For more frequent events, the partial duration series (or simply partial series) is better.” o Linsley, et al (Page 373): “When the design problem requires consideration of events with return periods less than 5 years, a partial flood series is preferable to the annual series. Use of such short return periods might be appropriate in urban drainage, where damage is small.” o Rao, et al (Page 9): “Cunnane (1973) developed a statistical method to compare the statistical efficiency of the T-year flood by two different methods.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: a Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan
    Volume 2002 Article 3 2002 San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan I. Waynne Cox Steve A. Tomka Raba Kistner, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita Part of the American Material Culture Commons, Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Environmental Studies Commons, Other American Studies Commons, Other Arts and Humanities Commons, Other History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, and the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Cite this Record Cox, I. Waynne and Tomka, Steve A. (2002) "San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan," Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: Vol. 2002, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.21112/ita.2002.1.3 ISSN: 2475-9333 Available at: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2002/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Regional Heritage Research at SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State by an authorized editor of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. San Jacinto Battleground and State Historical Park: A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License This article is available in Index of Texas Archaeology: Open Access Gray Literature from the Lone Star State: https://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ita/vol2002/iss1/3 San Jacinto Battleground State Historical Park A Historical Synthesis and Archaeological Management Plan by I.
    [Show full text]
  • Washburn Tunnel Wastewater Treatment
    Washburn Tunnel Wastewater Treatment Facility WASHBURN TUNNEL & Vince Bayou Receiving Station WASTEWATER TREATMENT Location: Pasadena, TX, on the Houston FACILITY & VINCE BAYOU Ship Channel RECEIVING STATION Process: Activated sludge with atmospheric and pure oxygen infusion (Washburn Tunnel) Capacity: 48 million gallons/day (Washburn Tunnel) 1.4 million gallons/month (Vince Bayou) Acquired in 1973 from Champion Paper Co. and immediately modified and improved, Washburn Tunnel was the first facility to be operated by GCA, providing an early demonstration of the effectiveness and viability of wastewater treatment on a regional scale. Washburn Tunnel serves refineries, petrochemical plants, bulk storage facilities and other local industries located along the Houston Ship Channel. The facility also treats approximately a million gallons per day of municipal waste- water from the City of Pasadena as well as volumes from GCA’s nearby Vince Bayou Receiving Station. The facility receives most of its wastewater via pipeline; one customer, a small specialty fuels refinery, delivers its waste by barge. Wastewater containing high concentra- tions of organic material goes through a two-step activated sludge treatment process involving oxygenation and aeration. The facility’s incoming low-strength streams are mixed with higher-content organic waste streams before the second step of aeration. The final stage of the process utilizes conventional secondary clarifiers to remove much of the remaining solids before the effluent is discharged into the Houston Ship Channel. Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority Gulf Coast Waste The diverse, complex nature of wastewater treated at 910 Bay Area Blvd. • Houston, Texas 77058 Disposal Authority Washburn Tunnel has helped produce a robust mixture Phone: 281.488.4115 www.gcwda.com of contaminant-consuming microorganisms.
    [Show full text]
  • GCHC NEWSLETTER FEBRUARY 2017.Pdf
    Issue 2 Volume 3 Grimes County Historical Commission February 2017 Meetings of the Grimes County Historical Commission are held on the Second Monday of the Month at 7:00 pm in the Courthouse Annex in Anderson, Texas Contact Information Joe King Fultz [email protected] Visit us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/Grim esCountyHistoricalCommission Grimes County Historical Commission Executive Board Photo of the Month Chairman Joe King Fultz Vice Chairman Vacant Secretary Vanessa Burzynski Treasurer Joe King Fultz COMMITTEES Historical Markers Denise Upchurch Historic Preservation Sarah Nash Newsletter & Publicity Vanessa Burzynski W. W. Meachum Law Office Anderson, Texas GRIMES COUNTY HISTORICAL COMMISSION NEWSLETTER FEBRUARY 2017 PAGE 2 History of the Town of Richards Richards is located on the Allen Vince one-half league RICHARDS, TEXAS. Richards is on Farm roads 1486 survey which the Mexican government granted him and 149 and the Burlington-Rock Island line in east on May 30, 1831. Vince, with his three brothers, central Grimes County. It was founded in 1907, when came to Texas in 1822 and settled on Sims Bayou in the residents of several communities in the vicinity present Harris County. His brothers settled along of Lake Creek moved to a newly constructed line of Vince’s Bayou and it was formerly thought the bridge the Trinity and Brazos Valley Railway where it across the Bayou was the one Sam Houston ordered crossed the road between Fairview (or Dolph) and destroyed before the Battle of San Jacinto, but today Longstreet. The area had been settled by Anglo- it has been proved to be the bridge over Sim’s Bayou American immigrants in the early 1830s, but no that had been built by Allen Vince.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Program 2013-2018 Appendix A
    Appendix A 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) 2012 Texas Integrated Report - Texas 303(d) List (Category 5) As required under Sections 303(d) and 304(a) of the federal Clean Water Act, this list identifies the water bodies in or bordering Texas for which effluent limitations are not stringent enough to implement water quality standards, and for which the associated pollutants are suitable for measurement by maximum daily load. In addition, the TCEQ also develops a schedule identifying Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) that will be initiated in the next two years for priority impaired waters. Issuance of permits to discharge into 303(d)-listed water bodies is described in the TCEQ regulatory guidance document Procedures to Implement the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (January 2003, RG-194). Impairments are limited to the geographic area described by the Assessment Unit and identified with a six or seven-digit AU_ID. A TMDL for each impaired parameter will be developed to allocate pollutant loads from contributing sources that affect the parameter of concern in each Assessment Unit. The TMDL will be identified and counted using a six or seven-digit AU_ID. Water Quality permits that are issued before a TMDL is approved will not increase pollutant loading that would contribute to the impairment identified for the Assessment Unit. Explanation of Column Headings SegID and Name: The unique identifier (SegID), segment name, and location of the water body. The SegID may be one of two types of numbers. The first type is a classified segment number (4 digits, e.g., 0218), as defined in Appendix A of the Texas Surface Water Quality Standards (TSWQS).
    [Show full text]
  • Houston a Year After Harvey: Where We Are and Where We Need to Be Presentation by Jim Blackburn Baker Institute and Bayou City Initiative August 30, 2018
    Houston A Year After Harvey: Where We Are and Where We Need To Be Presentation By Jim Blackburn Baker Institute and Bayou City Initiative August 30, 2018 Harris County Watersheds Population By Watershed Homes Flooded DuringNumber of Harvey Homes By Watershed Flooded in Hurricane Harvey 26,750 30,000 24,730 25,000 20,000 17,090 14,880 15,000 9,450 12,370 11,980 9,120 7,420 3,790 10,000 6,010 2,200 1,890 510 2,720 5,000 310 1,910 230 190 0 490 0 Percentage of Population with Flooded Homes - Per Watershed 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% Spring Creek Watershed 1% Willow Creek Watershed 1% Addicks Watershed 2% Barker Watershed 2% Luce Bayou Watershed 2% Armand Bayou Watershed 3% Cypress Creek Wshed. (w/ Little Cypr. Crk) 3% Galveston Bay Drainage 3% Vince Bayou Watershed 3% White Oak Bayou Watershed 3% Buffalo Bayou Watershed 4% Brays Bayou Wshed. (w/Willow Waterhole) 4% Spring Gulley & Goose Crk. Watershed 4% Greens Bayou Wshed. (w/Halls Bayou) 5% Sims Bayou Wshed. (w/Berry Bayou) 5% San Jacinto River Wshed. (w/Ship Channel) 5% Cedar Bayou Watershed 6% Clear Creek Watershed (w/Turkey Creek) 7% Hunting Bayou Watershed 10% Percentage of Population with Flooded Homes - Per Watershed 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% Spring Creek Watershed 1% Willow Creek Watershed 1% Addicks Watershed 2% Barker Watershed 2% Luce Bayou Watershed 2% Armand Bayou Watershed 3% Cypress Creek Wshed. (w/ Little Cypr. Crk) 3% Galveston Bay Drainage 3% Vince Bayou Watershed 3% White Oak Bayou Watershed 3% Buffalo Bayou Watershed 4% Brays Bayou Wshed.
    [Show full text]
  • Vince Bayou Final Report
    FINAL INTERIM ASSESSMENT OF THE PRESENCE AND CAUSES OF AMBIENT WATER AND SEDIMENT TOXICITY IN VINCE BAYOU, SEGMENT 1007A Prepared For TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD PROGRAM TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION P.O. BOX 13087, MC - 150 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087 Prepared By PARSONS PROJECT LEAD ORGANIZATION 8000 CENTRE PARK DR., SUITE 200 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78754 512-719-6000 FEBRUARY 2003 FINAL REPORT INTERIM ASSESSMENT OF THE PRESENCE AND CAUSES OF AMBIENT WATER AND SEDIMENT TOXICITY IN VINCE BAYOU, SEGMENT 1007A Prepared For TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD PROGRAM TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY P.O. BOX 13087, MC - 150 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-3087 Prepared By PARSONS PROJECT LEAD ORGANIZATION 8000 CENTRE PARK DR., SUITE 200 AUSTIN, TEXAS 78754 512-719-6000 FEBRUARY 2003 PREPARED IN COORPERATION WITH THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY The preparation of this report was financed through grants from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Assessment of the Presence and Causes of Ambient Sediment Toxicity Vince Bayou, Segment 1007A Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Vince Bayou Segment 1007A (Toxicity in Sediment) The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is responsible for administering provisions of the constitution and laws of the State of Texas to promote judicious use and the protection of the quality of waters in the State. A major aspect of this responsibility is the continuous monitoring and assessment of water quality to evaluate compliance with state water quality standards which are established within Texas Water Code, '26.023 and Title 30 Texas Administrative Code, ''307.1-307.10.
    [Show full text]
  • WASHBURN TUNNEL WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY & VINCE BAYOU RECEIVING STATION Gulf Coast Authority
    Washburn Tunnel Wastewater Treatment Facility WASHBURN TUNNEL & Vince Bayou Receiving Station WASTEWATER TREATMENT Location: Pasadena, TX, on the Houston FACILITY & VINCE BAYOU Ship Channel RECEIVING STATION Process: Activated sludge with atmospheric and pure oxygen infusion (Washburn Tunnel) Capacity: 48 million gallons/day (Washburn Tunnel) an early demonstration of the effectiveness and viability of wastewater treatment on a regional scale. plants, bulk storage facilities and other local industries located along the Houston Ship Channel. The facility also treats municipal wastewater from the City of Pasadena Receiving Station. waste by barge. Wastewater containing high concentra- tions of organic material goes through a two-step activated sludge treatment process involving oxygenation and aera- with higher-content organic waste streams before the remove much of the remaining solids. The treated waste- is discharged into the Houston Ship Channel. Gulf Coast Authority Gulf Coast Authority The diverse, complex nature of wastewater treated at 910 Bay Area Blvd. Houston, Texas 77058 Washburn Tunnel has helped produce a robust mixture Protecting the waters of the State of Phone: 281.488.4115 www.gcatx.org of contaminant-consuming microorganisms. Each year, Texas through environmentally sound Washburn Tunnel is called upon by other treatment and economically feasible regional facilities in the Greater Houston Area to provide sludge waste management practices for re-seeding plants whose microorganisms have been killed or weakened as a result of a shutdown or unexpected incident. Gulf Coast Authority request of the City of Houston and the State of Texas to GCA staff are experts in wastewater treatment and industrial solid waste management. its mission of protecting the waters of the state of Texas for treatment at Washburn Tunnel.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Consultation
    Health Consultation MCC RECYCLING, LLP FACILITY (SUBSIDIARY OF US OIL RECOVERY, LP) PASADENA, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS EPA FACILITY ID: TXN000606990 OCTOBER 27, 2009 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Division of Health Assessment and Consultation Atlanta, Georgia 30333 Health Consultation: A Note of Explanation An ATSDR health consultation is a verbal or written response from ATSDR to a specific request for information about health risks related to a specific site, a chemical release, or the presence of hazardous material. In order to prevent or mitigate exposures, a consultation may lead to specific actions, such as restricting use of or replacing water supplies; intensifying environmental sampling; restricting site access; or removing the contaminated material. In addition, consultations may recommend additional public health actions, such as conducting health surveillance activities to evaluate exposure or trends in adverse health outcomes; conducting biological indicators of exposure studies to assess exposure; and providing health education for health care providers and community members. This concludes the health consultation process for this site, unless additional information is obtained by ATSDR which, in the Agency’s opinion, indicates a need to revise or append the conclusions previously issued. You May Contact ATSDR TOLL FREE at 1-800-CDC-INFO or Visit our Home Page at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov HEALTH CONSULTATION MCC RECYCLING, LLP FACILITY (SUBSIDIARY OF US OIL RECOVERY, LP) PASADENA, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS EPA FACILITY ID: TXN000606990 Prepared By: Exposure Investigations and Site Assessment Branch Division of Health Assessment and Consultation Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Health Consultation Statement of Issues The U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Armand Bayou Watershed Plan Cover: Top Left Photo Courtesy Armand Bayou Nature Center; All Other Photos © Cliff Meinhardt Armand Bayou Watershed Plan Phase I
    Armand Bayou Watershed Plan COVER: TOP LEFT PHOTO COURTESY ARMAND BAYOU NATURE CENTER; ALL OTHER PHOTOS © CLIFF MEINHARDT Armand Bayou Watershed Plan Phase I A Report of the Coastal Coordination Council Pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No. NA170Z1140 Production of this document supported in part by Institutional Grant NA16RG1078 to Texas A&M University from the National Sea Grant Office, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, and a grant from ExxonMobil Coporation ii PHOTO © CLIFF MEINHARDT Contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................................................1 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................2 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................2 The Armand Bayou Watershed Partnership ..................................................................................................................2 State of the Watershed ..............................................................................................................................................2 Institutional Framework ..............................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Harris County, Texas and Incorporated Areas VOLUME 1 of 12
    Harris County, Texas and Incorporated Areas VOLUME 1 of 12 COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NO. COMMUNITY NAME COMMUNITY NO. Baytown, City of 485456 Nassau Bay, City of 485491 Bellaire, City of 480289 Pasadena, City of 480307 Bunker Hill Village, City of 1 480290 Pearland, City of 480077 Deer Park, City of 480291 Piney Point Village, City of 480308 El Lago, City of 485466 Seabrook, City of 485507 Galena Park, City of 480293 Shoreacres, City of 485510 Hedwig Village, City of1 480294 South Houston, City of 480311 Hilshire Village, City of 480295 Southside Place, City of 480312 Houston, City of 480296 Spring Valley Village, City of 480313 Humble, City of 480297 Stafford, City of 480233 Hunter’s Creek Village, City of 480298 Taylor Lake Village, City of 485513 Jacinto City, City of 480299 Tomball, City of 480315 Jersey Village, City of 480300 Webster, City of 485516 La Porte, City of 485487 West University Place, City of 480318 Missouri City, City of 480304 Harris County Unincorporated Areas 480287 Morgans Point, City of 480305 1 No Special Flood Hazard Areas identified REVISED: November 15, 2019 FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 48201CV001G NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. Part or all of this Flood Insurance Study may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of this Flood Insurance Study may be revised by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the Flood Insurance Study.
    [Show full text]
  • Houston, Texas 77002-1817  (713) 755-5113
    NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING April 5, 2013 Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Commissioners Court of Harris County, Texas, will be held on Tuesday, April 9, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. in the Courtroom of the Commissioners Court of Harris County, Texas, on the ninth floor of the Harris County Administration Building, 1001 Preston Avenue, Houston, Texas, for the purpose of considering and taking action on matters brought before the Court. Agendas may be obtained in advance of the court meeting in the Office of Coordination & Budget, Suite 938, Administration Building, 1001 Preston Avenue, Houston, Texas, in the Commissioners Court Courtroom on the day of the meeting, or via the internet at www.harriscountytx.gov/agenda. Stan Stanart, County Clerk and Ex-Officio Clerk of Commissioners Court of Harris County, Texas Olga Z. Mauzy, Director Commissioners Court Records HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS COMMISSIONERS COURT 1001 Preston, Suite 938 Houston, Texas 77002-1817 (713) 755-5113 Ed Emmett El Franco Lee Jack Morman Steve Radack R. Jack Cagle County Judge Commissioner, Precinct 1 Commissioner, Precinct 2 Commissioner, Precinct 3 Commissioner, Precinct 4 No. 13.07 AGENDA April 9, 2013 10:00 a.m. Opening prayer by Ameer Abuhalimeh, Executive Director of Islamic Dawaj Center in Houston. I. Departments 16. Travel & Training 1. Public Infrastructure Department a. Out of Texas a. Public Infrastructure b. In Texas b. Right of Way 17. Grants c. Construction Programs 18. Fiscal Services & Purchasing d. Flood Control District a. Auditor e. Architecture & Engineering b. Tax Assessor-Collector 2. Budget Management c. Purchasing 3.
    [Show full text]
  • SOUTH CAVALCADE STREET in Harris County, Texas Site Status
    US Oil Recovery Superfund Site Pasadena, Harris County, Texas EPA Region 6 EPA ID: TXN000607093 Site ID: A6X7 Congressional District: 29 Contact: Raji Josiam (214) 665-8529 Updated: October 2014 Background The US Oil Recovery (USOR) Site comprises of two separate properties which are located in Pasadena, Texas, north of Highway 225 (the Site) that began operations in 2002. US Oil Recovery operations at the 400 N. Richey Street property included receipt of municipal and industrial Class I and Class II wastewater, characteristically hazardous waste, used oil and oily sludges, and municipal solid waste. Its affiliate MCC Recycling (MCC) conducted associated operations at the 200 N. Richey Street property which was a former sewage treatment plant, owned by the City of Pasadena from approximately 1945 until it was acquired by USOR in January 2009. Wastes onsite generally consist of oily liquids and sludges containing concentrations of volatile organics, metals, and/or mercury. These onsite wastes are contained in various containers, including aboveground tanks, roll-off bins, frac tanks, drums, and totes. Arsenic, barium, cobalt, manganese, mercury, silver, and/or vanadium have been detected in some surface water and/or sediment samples collected within Vince Bayou near the Site. Several fish consumption advisories have been issued by the Texas Department of State Health Services for the Houston Ship Channel and Upper Galveston Bay, including Vince Bayou. These advisories, which were issued due to the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxins, and/or organochlorine pesticides in fish and/or crabs, recommend consumption of no more than one eight-ounce meal of all fish/crab species per month.
    [Show full text]