- 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: Houston drainage grid 'so obsolete it's just unbelievable'
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:13 am to LSU alum wannabe
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:13 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:
Nope. Neither do builders. Subdivisions put into Katy along Barker and Addicks backside reservoirs were never meant to go there.
People always want to blame this stuff on climate change. I say that people need to look at urban development. Developing and paving over wetlands and building near spillways rarely turns out positively.
1
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:15 am to GetCocky11
Not just wetlands. I don't think people realize how much water cow pastures can hold and absorb compared to concrete and rooftops.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:20 am to ihometiger
Democracy is a good thing, but it is the enemy of centralized, coordinated infrastructure planning and funding. We saw it in NO with the levee system before Katrina, we are seeing it with the proposed BR bridge/loop, and Houston's drainage issues are a glaring example.
Too many stakeholders arguing, too many NIMBYs, too many people who don't want to pay for somebody else's infrastructure. So shite never gets built. Perhaps what we need is a federal infrastructure czar. Hell, I don't know. I just know that corrupt, self interested local politicians aren't the people who should be in charge of it.
Too many stakeholders arguing, too many NIMBYs, too many people who don't want to pay for somebody else's infrastructure. So shite never gets built. Perhaps what we need is a federal infrastructure czar. Hell, I don't know. I just know that corrupt, self interested local politicians aren't the people who should be in charge of it.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:25 am to Mr Sausage
quote:
People don't want to admit that the solution is to condemn property in areas like Meyerland and make those areas detain before their runoff hits the bayous.
This was the argument over New Orleans East and sooner or later it will be proven that it should not have been rebuilt.
And I get the "nothing can stop 50 inches" arguement but what we need to realize is these types of storms are happening at a more frequent pace. All over the coast. Same arguement in New Orleans, Baton Rouge last year etc...
In my unprofessional but old opinion times are changing climate wise. It is hotter and much wetter than previously. I'm not going to argue the cause behind it because I'm not qualified but weather has changed and I think anyone can see that.
I'm also aware that development and sprawl is a big issue-concrete specifically and needs the addressed-as per your solution regarding mitigated areas as well as future development.
This post was edited on 8/30/17 at 7:28 am
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:25 am to LSU alum wannabe
Guys, these houses flooding on the west side of Barker are not in the floodplain. It's not like they are a bunch of squatters that just showed up and built a house.
The USACE owns all the land that Barker and Addicks floods in a 100 yr flood, just like any lake or river authority owns the land around any large impoundment.
Meyerland, yes. That's a Clusterfrick. they start flooding when someone pisses in the street.
The USACE owns all the land that Barker and Addicks floods in a 100 yr flood, just like any lake or river authority owns the land around any large impoundment.
Meyerland, yes. That's a Clusterfrick. they start flooding when someone pisses in the street.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:37 am to Mr Sausage
quote:
Guys, these houses flooding on the west side of Barker are not in the floodplain. It's not like they are a bunch of squatters that just showed up and built a house.
The Corps of Engineers fought tooth and nail against development in the areas that flooded.
They knew flooding beyond their reservoirs was possible, presented that information publicly, and made strenuous arguments against permitting in those areas.
I lived out that way for 30 years. I remember when it was going on.
What you have, both in the case of the Lakes on Eldridge subdivisions NW of Addicks and with the subdivisions immediately west of the Barker reservoir, is a case of GREEDY DEVELOPERS and corrupt county officials who didn't listen to the USACE because what they had to say didn't favor their developer buddies.
This post was edited on 8/30/17 at 7:38 am
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:41 am to Cooter Davenport
quote:
The Corps of Engineers fought tooth and nail against development in the areas that flooded.
They knew flooding beyond their reservoirs was possible, presented that information publicly, and made strenuous arguments against permitting in those areas.
I lived out that way for 30 years. I remember when it was going on.
What you have, both in the case of the Lakes on Eldridge subdivisions NW of Addicks and with the subdivisions immediately west of the Barker reservoir, is a case of GREEDY DEVELOPERS and corrupt county officials who didn't listen to the USACE because what they had to say didn't favor their developer buddies.
And rest assured the Corp will take the brunt of the heat for opening the reservoirs regardless of how it developed.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:45 am to Martini
quote:
And rest assured the Corp will take the brunt of the heat for opening the reservoirs regardless of how it developed.
That's how it goes. And the people will try to rebuild in the same spot, even though they now have more knowledge of the risks.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 7:52 am to GetCocky11
I don't know what happened 30 years ago, but you are probably right. The sad part to me is a lot of these folks west of the reservoirs had no idea what could happen in an extreme event.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:03 am to ihometiger
Link says it's the third 100 year storm in the last 3 years.
Hmm wonder what scientists are going to blame this storm on...
Hmm wonder what scientists are going to blame this storm on...
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:07 am to ihometiger
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:07 am to Mr Sausage
quote:
I don't know what happened 30 years ago, but you are probably right.
Well, I do, and I'm definitely right. Feel free to fact-check away. What you will find is that the Corps didn't hide any of this potential and made a more than good faith effort in opposing the construction of those neighborhoods. You'll find newspaper articles if you search archives, it was a semi-big deal at the time.
I'm not in any way shape or form related in an official or unofficial capacity to the Corps. I'm just saying this in the interest of the truth, as someone who is rustled because the media does a piss-poor job of telling people what REALLY happened.
quote:
The sad part to me is a lot of these folks west of the reservoirs had no idea what could happen in an extreme event.
100% agree. Probably 95% of those people aren't from anywhere near there and had no clue about the Corps' official position on those reservoirs and the responsibility (or lack thereof) of building there. They assumed, incorrectly, that the county cared more about its citizens than developers.
This post was edited on 8/30/17 at 8:08 am
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:11 am to ShaneTheLegLechler
That, and every city doesn't have the funds to maintain every asset in the city. You prioritize based on cash flows and the % chance of something happening.
This post was edited on 8/30/17 at 8:12 am
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:21 am to Mr Sausage
quote:
Standard Houston/Harris county design is a 100 year storm
If I'm not mistaken, Katrina and Sandy were both 100-year floods in those areas. I'm not sure about Baton Rouge last year or South Carolina in 2015, but Harvey is obviously at that level. If we're having at least three and possibly five 100-year storms in a 12-year period, I think we need to redefine the term. Historical records are not going to be reliable for the current situation and the near future.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:24 am to GetCocky11
quote:
hat's how it goes. And the people will try to rebuild in the same spot, even though they now have more knowledge of the risks.
What's worse is taxpayers will have to insure them.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:25 am to crewdepoo
quote:
Link says it's the third 100 year storm in the last 3 years.
If it happens three times in three years, it's not a 100-year storm. The term needs to be redefined for current purposes. The last 100 or 200 years aren't very informative about the next 20 or 50 when it comes to storms, floods, etc.
quote:
Hmm wonder what scientists are going to blame this storm on...
Probably angry rain gods.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:29 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
If I'm not mistaken, Katrina and Sandy were both 100-year floods in those areas. I'm not sure about Baton Rouge last year or South Carolina in 2015, but Harvey is obviously at that level. If we're having at least three and possibly five 100-year storms in a 12-year period, I think we need to redefine the term. Historical records are not going to be reliable for the current situation and the near future.
South Carolina actually hit the 1,000 year flood level in 2015.
I do agree that the term needs to be redefined.
This post was edited on 8/30/17 at 8:30 am
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:41 am to Nuts4LSU
quote:
If it happens three times in three years, it's not a 100-year storm. The term needs to be redefined for current purposes. The last 100 or 200 years aren't very informative about the next 20 or 50 when it comes to storms, floods, etc.
Exactly. And these systems were built within the past 50-100 years. They really haven't been tested that much. It only takes on storm to blow the whole system open, as we'be seen.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:53 am to cahoots
Don't get pissy Cooter. I am not arguing with you or trying to fact check.
Should we not allow houses on lakes or rivers too? No one accounts for this amount of water. Not the USACE, not HCFCD, nobody.
Should we not allow houses on lakes or rivers too? No one accounts for this amount of water. Not the USACE, not HCFCD, nobody.
Posted on 8/30/17 at 8:54 am to GetCocky11
Just to be clear a 100 yr flood terminology is localized. We had a 500 yr flood in Biloxi with Katrina. That has no effect that Baton Rouge had a 100 yr flood last year. Baton Rouge is supposed to have a flood like that every 100 yrs
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News