Travis County Commissioners Court
July 10, 2007
Item 3
Pete, item number 3. Receive briefing on recent flooding in Travis County and surrounding areas and take appropriate action.
>> good morning, pete baldwin, Travis County emergency management coordinator. Just very quickly, the lake is starting to recede. We're looking at about a two-foot drop every three days with current gate operations. If that continues, we expect the last house on graveyard point to come out of the water about this time next week.
>> per dam releasing water?
>> current gate operations we still have four gates open on travis and three on tom miller. So they are passing water through fairly quickly. Current elevation on Lake Travis was 694 so it is starting to recede. We expect the last house on graveyard point to come out sometime next week. Several of the issues we're looking at in the meantime as we prepare for the fema teams to come in next week and do the damage assessments for individual assistance and public assistance, in the interim we're taking steps to try to assist with those, we have gotten with our health department and will be providing tetanus vaccine for residents in the event they need a tetanus shot after being exposed to that water. We will be meeting with t.n.r. And I know purchasing wants to sit in on it too to discuss and lcra to discuss possibly debris removal options and strategies as we move along. Stacy has some information.
>> basically we have between 150 and 200 structures under water. Water.
>> repeat that.
>> from 100 to 250 structures under water. We estimate that about 100 of those are residences. The other 150 are outbuildings or commercial structures. It is likely that some of these structures will be substantially damaged once they dry out. We can assess that damage. We are looking into hazard mitigation grant program to see if we can apply for it for some of the structures. Some of the folks have shown interest in the buyout program and we're continuing to assess the damage as the water goes down.
>> the ability for Travis County to access this grant program for buyout is not limited to the fact we do or do not get declared in the presidential disaster declaration. Any time there is a presidential disaster declaration declared within the state of Texas, counties are eligible to apply for the hazard mitigation grant money. So we know we already have six counties trying to get disaster declarations and they are trying to get more added that will not preclude us from applying for some of that money. Of course, first choice is some of those damaged counties.
>> that buy outis the same as the others, it's totally voluntary.
>> yes.
>> the substantial damage rule is ours but it's a requirement of fema, isn't it?
>> yes, the requirement comes down from fema. Our contract with fema to get the flood insurance requires that we do the substantial damage rule. In Travis County that is -- if you are greater than 50% damaged, that is substantial damage and it is for three events and 10 years and it's councilmember la active. -- cumulative.
>> on this hazard mitt gays grant, you -- mitigation grant, you have to submit an application?
>> yes.
>> and are we working on the application or waiting to see --
>> we were discussing that this morning with melinda and joe geiselman and stacy and I visiting about when is the proper time to start that. But I think the sooner the better.
>> the numbers you mention mentioned earlier, there are several folks that may be interested in the buyout program. Of these particular properties, from 100 to 250 structures that are under water, do we know approximately at this time how many of these folks are willing to participate in the buyout program especially if there is substantial damage? More than 50% of those properties or structures, have they basically been coming forward and, of course, there's still the possibility of some of these particular structures, I guess the residential or whatever else, may be looked at as far as looking at elevation of these structures in the future to comply, to come in compliance because of then increasing elevation. This will be unfolded as we continue to move forward as far as assessment is concerned?
>> [one moment, please, for change in captioners]
>> ... Throughout the entire county that we can go back in and apply for money for those, but to answer your question, none of those are as important as the buyout goes right now. In other words, if we were looking at trying to raise west beach circle to meet the one hundred year floodplain, we wouldn't even include that because of costs associated with it. But, yes, it is possible to use funds for different things if we've identified those in our mitigation action.
>> the reason I ask that I probably get ten-to-one comments made to me about people being insensed over using tax dollars for people that continue to want to live in areas like this when they know what is going to happen. And that is -- you know, I know that that sounds harsh to some people, if you asked the every day person on the street, I mean, do you want some of your tax dollars to be used to go in and help some of these people, I mean it's the first time -- it's kind of like you probably should have known, it's past the first time, you see that number rise people that become very insensed about I don't want you to spend any of my tax dollars to help those folks, I want them out of there, and whatever it takes, but I'll get -- stacey, you probably come to the office and give me a full --
>> these are not new structures. We do not allow new structures to be built this low. These structures were all in place prior to us having any idea about the floodplain or adopting any regulations, these are old structures built before 1976 in most cases.
>> what is the criteria? Is there an income level? Is there property valuation level? Improvement, valuation of the improvement to properties of how is the -- the -- is it --
>> it varies per grant application, but it really doesn't have anything to do with the individual. It has to do with the property and how prone it is to flooding. It's not specific.
>> is it a cost benefit analysis process that happens to basically we need to show that the benefit of buying the property is greater than the cost of the national flood insurance paying to rebuild it or repair it? If stayscy claires some substantially damaged then that is sort of an automatic benefit, it's already inherent if that, but if any properties aren't substantially damaged, then we'll have to run a model, a cost benefit model and prove that it's -- this addresses the taxpayer's concerns that it's really cost effective to buy it.
>> is that true similar to the roads? Now, how does that work with the roads? Was it significant damage done to the roads after everything kind of settled out and you went and looked as far as the road damage? Is there -- what -- what funding would address the repair of the roads if there were significant damage done to roads?
>> that would come out of the public assistance grant if we were declared eligible, there are several categories to public assistance, one such debris removal, another cat dwoir for emergency response, another for infrastructure repair, but when they start looking at infrastructure repair, they start looking at the total cost versus the county's ability to pay, what is insured, what is not insured, just to be real honest with you, it takes significant damage to roads and infrastructure to get that type of thing. We're talking about taking out water treatment plants. We're talking about, I mean, a lot of significant damage, and, yes, we've had damage in the northwesten but -- and it is -- it won't be inexpensive, but it's not considered significant. I can -- I can relate to you in '91 in the christmas floods we documented every pot hole that we could find on every road throughout the county. We came in, we were so proud, we had boxes and boxes of folders for the fema people, when they said we don't care about this little stuff, we need to see big, big damage projects that kick the cost up, so we've learned over the years to do more --
>> okay. Thank you.
>> have you back on.
>> yes, sir.
>> thank you.
>> thank you.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, July 11, 2007, 11:00 AM