Thursday, July 12, 2012

Guidelines and Constraints for Subcommittee Proposals


Guidelines for Subcommittee Proposals

Now that the various subcommittees for the CLC Green Plan Golf Course Reutilization Advisory Group have started to work on their proposals, a number of questions have come up about the current status and plans for the land. The following will attempt to address some of these questions and can be used as a guideline for considering options by the subcommittees.

Current Status
The CLC Water Authority Board has purchased the former Clear Lake Golf Course for the purpose of adding stormwater detention capability consistent with the CLCWA charter. Approximately 2038 acres drain into the land. Most of that drainage is from the north and west sides of the golf course, but some of the land on the other sides of the course also drain into it. This is only a portion of the area known as Clear Lake City, but the stormwater detention provided by the plan will help prevent flooding in much of the area through related impacts in waterways like Horsepen Bayou.

The land purchased by the Water Authority totals 178 acres. Hydrology studies contracted by the Water Authority indicate that the Harris County standard of detaining a 6 inch rain is insufficient to prevent significant flooding in Clear Lake due to the heavier rainfall experienced in the southern part of Harris County. By increasing the detention standard to accommodate a 12 inch rain, the flooding potential in Clear Lake can be greatly reduced. This is the standard the Water Authority has adopted, and the one they are trying to accommodate with the former Golf Course land.

To hold a 12 inch rainfall from the 2038 acres draining into the golf course land, the average elevation must be reduced by 11.4 feet. This is a very simplistic way of looking at the engineering involved, but it gives some idea of the changes needed. The depth of the land can be easily calculated using the following formula:

Depth  =  2038 acres drained X 1 foot (12 inches) of rainfall  /  178 acres in the golf course

This calculation sets the average depth, which is 11 and ½ feet. Since the digging would not be straight down, and since some “set back” is needed to prevent erosion by the stormwater runoff from the surrounding homes, the lowest depth will be greater than the average, probably closer to 12 – 13 feet. Drainage and other hydrology considerations will further adjust the specific elevations at any specific location.

The only unwavering standard from the Water Authority is that the land will be used for stormwater detention, and it must be engineered to detain the 1 foot rainfall from the 2038 acres draining to the land.

Since the purchase of the land, the Water Authority has initiated the CLC Green Plan Advisory Group and commissioned various subcommittees to recommend additional “shared” uses for the land. The Water Authority has also hired SWA Landscape Architects to assist in preparing a Master Plan to be used in further negotiations with the City, Harris County, and Harris County Flood Control. The Master Plan will also be used to apply for funding grants from businesses, local, State and Federal agencies to construct and maintain the amenities that will be planned for the shared uses of the land. At this time, a MASTER PLAN DOES NOT EXIST. The Master Plan will be developed from decisions made by the Water Authority; these decisions will be based on the recommendations of the various subcommittees, recommendations from SWA, the Water Authority evaluation of the feasibility of the various proposals, and the Water Authority evaluation of the greatest benefit to the community from the amenities. The Master Plan will not be the final design document. It is still a broad conceptual document laying out the general direction the CLCWA intends to go, with many details yet to be worked out. The preliminary sketches created by SWA are not the Master Plan. The sketches are merely potential concepts that carry no more weight than any recommendations from the subcommittees. The sketches and concepts from SWA should not be considered constraints or final plans in any manner.



Subcommittee Constraints
The only hard and fast constraint is that the land will be used to hold the one foot rainfall from the 2038 acres being drained. The other constraints presented at the May 10 Town Hall Meeting should be viewed as City, County or Flood Control standards. These standards could be negotiated as long as the intent of the standard is met by the proposals. In particular, the 30 foot setback standard can be negotiated; SWA assumed that the setback could be changed in developing their proposal. Subcommittees have this same capability in developing their plans. However, when any of the secondary constraints from the May 10 meeting are “violated” in a proposal, the Subcommittee should highlight this as an area that will need to be negotiated between the Water Authority and the other governmental bodies. Similarly the setback does not have to be fixed at all locations. If it is desired to vary the setback to accommodate large trees or other “nature preserves”, this can be considered as long as the primary use of stormwater detention can be met. Please note that the negotiation around these secondary standards is a Water Authority responsibility. Subcommittees are free to recommend deviations from the standards, but the negotiations regarding them will be done later by the Water Authority during the subsequent development of the Master Plan.

Other constraints like access and additional parking are likewise flexible. While it is desired that no “hard surface” areas (concrete or asphalt) be added, additional access and parking using permeable surfaces could be considered. There are likely to be many requests for land near the existing hard surface parking areas, so highlighting of alternate access and potential permeable parking areas might be well received.

The “constraints” created by the SWA proposal that uses much of the land as lakes should not deter subcommittees from proposing alternate uses for the land. The SWA concept has no more weight than any subcommittee proposal.

Conclusion
Both the Clear Lake Green Plan Advisory Committee and the Water Authority want to express our gratitude to the many volunteers who are working to develop proposals. We see this effort as a key in defining the best uses for the land that bring the greatest benefit to the entire community. We want your ideas and concepts, and the ideas should not be fettered by unnecessary constraints from any source. All ideas are welcome, and the Water Authority also wants to hear any potential concerns so that they can better evaluate the various proposals.

No comments:

Post a Comment