[This is a re-post of an essay published back in 2014 after I served as a judge for the Environmental Protection Agency’s annual Campus Rainworks Challenge.]

My eldest daughter is attending a collaborative, exciting, and dynamic high school.  When I pass through the halls of her school and see the young energy, enthusiasm, and creativity flowing from person to person and bouncing off the walls I feel a bit jealous.  It would be really fun to be back in school again.

A similar feeling welled up inside as I participated in the second round judging process for the 2013 Campus Rainworks Challenge.  Ten student teams passed round one judging in the Site Design Plan category.  They provided green infrastructure and low impact development design concepts for campus libraries, art museums, common areas, court yards, transportation links, and parking areas.  Six student teams passed round one judging in the Master Plan category.  They provided conceptual plans for larger areas of their campuses.

THE KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY CONTEST ENTRY.

The submittals illustrated interactive art, water-powered sculptures, landscaped bioretention areas, information kiosks, and green walls.  The submissions were presented in a wide variety of video formats.  Vibrant renderings and creative video production techniques allowed me to experience a bit of the fun, collaboration, and exciting process the teams must have experienced as they developed their designs.

I watched the videos.  I reviewed the design submittals.  I felt the enthusiasm. Then in late February 2014 I hopped on a plane to Reagan International Airport and then the METRO to visit EPA Headquarters near the Federal Triangle METRO stop.  As the METRO smoothly carried me past the Netflix House of Cards posters in every station (did METRO know about what happens in Season 2 Episode 1?) I realized that I had never been to EPA Headquarter in my 23 years in the environmental engineering consulting field.  Now I was really excited.

When I arrived I marveled at high ceilings and neoclassical design of the building.  Built in the early 1930s, the building originally was the headquarters of the U.S. Post Office Department, before its name was changed to the U.S. Postal Service in 1971.

Truth be told: it was challenging to determine winners.  The American Society of Landscape Architects provided Michael Vergason and Dennis Nola as judges.  Daniel Christian and I served as judges from the Water Environment Federation, and Robert Goo and Mike Borst joined the judging team from U.S. EPA.  Led by Tamara Mittman, our EPA facilitator, we debated and discussed the merits of all submissions.  At the end of morning of heated discussion we provided a consensus list of the top three submittals in both the Master Plan and Site Design categories.  The winners were selected by Nancy Stoner, Acting Assistant Administrator for Water, U.S. EPA, and I look forward to congratulating them and all the participating teams. Meanwhile, Happy Earth Day!

Myth #1: If we have three 100-yr floods in the space of 3 years, development and bad engineering must be to blame!

The 100-yr flood is the average period between rain events of certain size. There is a 1% chance of that size rain occurring EVERY year.  There is a 26% chance of that size storm occurring during a 30-yr mortgage.

Myth #2: Development makes flooding worse.

New development must include places to store water and must prove that flood levels in the area are not increased. New development does not increase flooding levels.

Myth #3: If you live somewhere for 30 years without a flood and you get flooded, something on the ground changed to cause it.

Flood waters come from rain. If you avoided flooding for 30 years it likely means that no large rain events occurred in your area.  A flood in your area probably resulted from an abnormally large rain event.

Myth #4: The streets in my area flood because of incompetence and mistakes.

Our flat terrain does not provide many places for the water to go, so we use the streets.  The streets are designed to flood above a certain size rain event to avoid flooding homes and business.

Myth #5: They are using outdated and old approaches to address drainage and flooding.

We use lasers to map the ground surface, we use advanced computer models to predict where water will flow and how high it will get.  We are now using “natural drainage” systems and “natural channel design” approaches in many projects.

Myth #6: Fill dirt used to raise a property for a new building causes flooding.

Site changes must be planned by a professional engineer. Places to move and store water must be provided. The engineer must prove that flood levels in the area are not increased. New development does not increase flooding.

Myth #7: Preserving greenspace will prevent flooding.

Preservation plays a role and can help, however new development is required to mimic the pre-development conditions. It is important to remember that Houston was flood prone prior to any development.

Myth #8: Widening and deepening all the bayous will prevent flooding.

It can help, but existing homes and businesses are frequently in the way and may be lower than the bayous banks.  Houston’s flat terrain limits how deep we can dig.  In many cases the issue is getting the water to the bayou.

Myth #9: Flooding is terrible because none of these new developments are following the rules!

Registered professional engineers must make all plans and follow regulations. Local governments must approve all plans. Inspectors check that construction is done according to these plans.

Myth #10: We can just rebuild all of the storm pipes and channels and everything will be fixed.

We are making new investments in drainage and flooding systems every year, but there are many pipes and channels that were built before the 1980s. To reduce the risk of flooding for everyone to less than 1% each year would take about $29 billion.