Inwood Forest Golf Course Next in Line for Stormwater Detention Basin Treatment

INWOOD FOREST GOLF COURSE NEXT IN LINE FOR STORMWATER DETENTION BASIN TREATMENT One of the next spots up for retrofitting as a series of flood detention ponds: the rest of the Inwood Forest Golf Course, which the city bought in 2011 after that lawsuit over whether it could be developed as anything else. The Chronicle’s Mike Morris reports that a set of 10 new ponds were approved by city council on Wednesday for the former fairways, which sprawl on either side of Antoine Rd. between Victory Dr. and W. Gulf Bank Rd. interspersed with bits of residential neighborhood. (A pair of basins was previously dug out on the site; the new project could increase the course’s water feature storage volume from 56 to more than 1000 acre-feet, potentially.) The former clubhouse for the course, at 7603 Antoine Dr., has also found new employment as the White Oak Conference Center, and currently houses some operations of the Near Northwest Management District. Inwood Forest isn’t the first golf course in Houston being put to new flood-conscious uses — across town, an ongoing project in Clear Lake has been converting the former Clear Lake City Golf Course into a series of detention basins and park spaces going by the name Exploration Green. It potentially isn’t the last, either — the Sims-Bayou-side Glenbrook Park Golf Course may eventually be converted into the Houston Botanic Garden, the Seussical early renderings of which include large sections designed to flood.  [Houston Chronicle; previously on Swamplot] Photo of former Inwood Forest Golf Course green near White Oak Conference Center: White Oak Conference Center

14 Comment

  • Hopefully the detention basins can be added without ruining the trails that go through these old golf courses.

    I have ridden on them a few times and judging by the amount of wildlife I saw I don’t think they are used very often, but they could be.

  • Wouldn’t we be better off if more golf courses were converted to detention + parks? I feel (correct me if I’m wrong) that the amount of land vs the amount of public benefit of a public golf course is pretty low. Low income people can’t just borrow some clubs at the clubhouse and golf for free. The whole construct seems to be a terrible use of public land. Going to a park is free. Everyone can enjoy a park.

  • ‘ Detention basins ” during a Houston flood DO NOT prevent flooding anywhere. The status quo aka the establishment is foisting another tax payer boondoggle on the over burdened tax payers. These ponds DO NOT work in Houston . They’re a colossal waste of tax dollars and scarce resources. The viable solution: a WORKABLE comprehensive city /county wide development plan with well thought out protocols and guidelines. Because the way things are going, Houston is going to be covered in concrete and under increasingly higher / deeper flood waters.. And quite a good number of local government officials DO NOT care…

  • @Seymour – Since its a HCFCD project expect to see a nice trail system throughout. Look at Keith Weiss Park on Greens Bayou.

    @Donald – Detention basins are very effective at reducing peak water surface elevations when designed correctly and that is why you see them utilized in almost all new development (roadway\commercial\residential). I don’t follow the rest of your comment. Before you criticize current standards… you should probably read them. HCFCD has their standards on their website and COH is included in chapter 19.

  • @Donald, you are right that officials don’t care but wrong that detention basins don’t work. We need more detention basins everywhere and they can be put under existing parks rather easily.

  • @ Frustrated: if detention ponds do work, as you assert, and city “officials” are implementing them, then it doesn’t follow that they don’t care, as you also assert.
    Look, cynical and evidence-avoidant ranting seems to be your trademark, but self-contradicting, cynical and evidence-avoidant ranting? Really?

  • Just like the other Donald J. Trump …. he likes to hear himself but typically knows little to nothing about what he is talking about. Perhaps a wall would be better????

  • @Kokatat HCFCD doesn’t build trails. They only build flood control. Their funds do not go to park or recreational features. Keith-Wiess Park is a city owned park. The funding for the park sections came from the City. That project is totally different than the Inwood Forest Detention Project. Keith-Wiess was built on open forested land. The Inwood Forest project is going to be built on separated golf courses around a pre-built neighborhood. There is no way they can recreate that project here. The closest thing to this project, is the “Exploration Green” project the article mentions. The Mayor has promised a recreational park for Inwood Forest, but as of right now…there is no funding for that. There is only HCFCD funding for building the detention.

  • Inward Forest is a toilet. It’s the ‘hood all over, and we are lucky to have gotten out of there. The school district sucks, the streets are dangerous, the place floods… there is nothing good about that place.

  • @reader – nice straw man attack. Anyhow, the only reason they are putting in detention ponds here is because they are deed restricted against selling to a developer which they didn’t know when they bought the property. If city officials cared about stopping flooding then they would be advocating detention ponds everywhere which they most certainly are not doing despite the fact that they can be easily and cost effectively (by 4th largest city standards) be placed underneath existing parks and ball fields. If you can find an article where mayor turner talks about making detention ponds his number one priority, please post a link and win your argument. Too bad he has never done that, instead choosing to stonewall flood victims.

  • @ Frustrated: you make allegations that you cannot prove about city officials and about detention ponds. And sometimes you trip over yourself in doing it. That’s what I pointed out, and nothing you’ve said contradicts me.

  • @Reader – prove your point and post a link to the article where turner describes his holistic plan to address flooding across the city, temporarily even using tirz money for fkooding as opposed to giving it away to his campaign donors.

  • @ Frustrated: you’ve mixed me up with someone who made those arguments, or someone you *thought* made those arguments. That’d be a strawman, so look at the transcript of our comments and see what I did say, all of which remains uncontested.
    As for what Turner has done, you and I have already disagreed about the efficacy of his plan for cleaning out the drainage infrastructure of the city. You may not like the plan or think that it’s enough, but it’s citywide (i.e., holistic), and it addresses the problem of flooding (i.e., contradicts your assertion about “officials” not caring). You’ve forgotten, so I’ll remind you of the facts:
    and on Swamplot where you made your typical evidence-free rant,

  • @reader – i think you might be stalking me, lol. Anyway, after the mlk day flood city council stopped talking about the grossly inadequate “swat” plan. I think they realized and were embarassed to put out such a joke of a plan. Only you are oddly defending it here. City council did come up with a rather obvious plan for meyerland which is good, but there is still no plan for the rest of the city and no one in the political class will talk about reforming building codes or revoking subsidies to developers to send to their proper use of building detention ponds.