- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: East Baton Rouge official calls for moratorium on development in high-risk floodplains
Posted on 9/21/17 at 12:53 pm to goofball
Posted on 9/21/17 at 12:53 pm to goofball
quote:
IMO we should make investments into retention areas and diversion canals to better protect the population centers, and discourage development in areas that regularly flood.
And who pays for it?
How?
2
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:06 pm to CWS91
Damnnnnnnnn is that right? That settles it then. No need to worry about the things we can control because we can't control when the main ingredient for a flood will show up.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:29 pm to magildachunks
quote:
And who pays for it?
There is already federal and local funding (through a dedicated tax) for the diversion canal.
The state refuses to put up anything, which is causing delays along with the environmental and wetlands mitigation requirements.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:41 pm to slackster
quote:
Yeah, this seems like an overreaction. If you want to build in a flood plain, go right ahead. Your insurance will be commensurate with the risk you're taking.
Exactly. The last thing we need is more codes, licensing and permitting requirements.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:44 pm to magildachunks
quote:
magildachunks
quote:
And who pays for it?
FEMA via the US Taxpayers. In fact they already did. The Capital Region received close to a quarter of a billion dollars in Hazard Mitigation Grant Program dollars to buyout repetitively flooded properties, elevate others and to implement large-scale drainage projects. This was announced just a few months ago.
The question will ultimately be how much of this amount-which is cut up into differing amounts by Parish-will be spent collaboratively...and how much will be spent on internally important-but ultimately not regionally effective-projects that reduce threats and impacts of flooding and disasters.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:50 pm to GFunk
quote:
GFunk
God dammit, I laugh every time I see that avatar pic.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:56 pm to SlapahoeTribe
And what about the people who didn't build in a flood plain but now live in one because people filled the flood plain up with dirt and houses?
Posted on 9/21/17 at 1:59 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
And what about the people who didn't build in a flood plain but now live in one because people filled the flood plain up with dirt and houses?
What area are you suggesting where this happened?
Posted on 9/21/17 at 2:05 pm to slackster
quote:
quote:
And what about the people who didn't build in a flood plain but now live in one because people filled the flood plain up with dirt and houses?
What area are you suggesting where this happened?
It definitely can happen over time. That's why a lot of cities have implemented codes stating that any development in the floodplain must show a no-rise. Sometimes you can get away with it if the rise is just on your property.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 2:12 pm to slackster
I'm not doing your homework for you. Happened all over dutchtown last year.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 2:39 pm to LSUengr
quote:
ill placed in that flood zone must be offset with dirt dug from the same flood zone. That dirt must come from above any water surface you create in a lake or pond so that you are replacing air with air.
See this is where I get confused. So you are only accounting for "fill" or basically the little islands you are creating for each home. But, is the non-elevated ground that was there before (trees, shrubs, grass, dirt that previously stored high volumes of water) accounted for?
This may have not been enough to stop all the flooding, but it seems like it could certainly create a localized flood risk for homes and neighborhoods that for decades relied these lower areas to hold water.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 2:41 pm to goofball
I applaud this. Houston should have reigned it in decades ago.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 2:49 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
I'm not doing your homework for you. Happened all over dutchtown last year.
You're the one making claims that it is happening, so I wanted to know what specific area so I can look into it. Thanks.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 2:59 pm to goofball
quote:
It doesn't include a lot of the areas that flooded.
In fairness, a lot of areas that flooded last year were not in the 100 year floodplain.
it only includes flood zone A - which is the FEMA required flood insurance area. sounds like they want to increase 1) the height above the 100 year flood elevation people are required to build at in this zone and 2) new subdivisions will need more green space when developed in these areas.... all sensible changes....
Posted on 9/21/17 at 3:04 pm to tigeraddict
Developers will fight tooth and nail any and all efforts to make development more expensive. In years past that effort focused on trying to make them pay for traffic mitigation. Now it's going to be them having to elevate.
But some of this is consumer choice. Louisianians before about 50 or so years ago would just assume pier and beam their foundation than concrete slab. That construction method and preference or perceived higher quality build finish has made it much more expensive to build elevated homes without increasing the amount of fill a developer brings into low-lying areas.
But some of this is consumer choice. Louisianians before about 50 or so years ago would just assume pier and beam their foundation than concrete slab. That construction method and preference or perceived higher quality build finish has made it much more expensive to build elevated homes without increasing the amount of fill a developer brings into low-lying areas.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 3:30 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
I'm not doing your homework for you. Happened all over dutchtown last year.
After looking at the flood maps and the flooded structures on the Ascension Parish flood map, I don't see any parts of Dutchtown that flooded that weren't in Zone A or Zone AE. I'm not sure what specific older parts of Dutchtown you feel were flooded due to new construction, but it looks like they were all in the 100-year floodplain.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 3:35 pm to slackster
quote:
What area are you suggesting where this happened
My dad's house.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 3:51 pm to magildachunks
quote:
My dad's house.
I guess a better question is what is the reason for blaming new construction? I'm not suggesting it is faultless, FWIW.
Posted on 9/21/17 at 3:55 pm to slackster
quote:
guess a better question is what is the reason for blaming new construction? I'm not suggesting it is faultless, FWIW.
Developer built two new neighborhoods in the swamp that my dad's neighborhood and the one that is on the other side of the swamp drained into.
The storm came and the two new neighborhood, which was elevated with outside dirt, did not flood, but the two older neighborhoods did.
First time in 35 years my dad's house got water in it. Including the flood of 82/83. That swamp used to flood, but the neighborhoods were safe.
This post was edited on 9/21/17 at 3:56 pm
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News