Hello There, Guest! Registered users see far less ads! Register today and join our virtual tailgate. (Login — Register)

Post Reply 
Hurricane Harvey
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,659
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5053
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #421
RE: Hurricane Harvey
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/...169740.php

School starts delayed across the area. Some buildings will be closed for the school year. HISD, with nearly 300 schools is still evaluating. They haven't been able to get to about 15 of their school yet. So far, 53 "heavily damaged" and 22 "severely damaged."
09-03-2017 07:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WoodlandsOwl Offline
Up in the Woods
*

Posts: 11,806
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #422
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-01-2017 10:13 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(09-01-2017 06:23 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  
(09-01-2017 05:49 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  Anybody have any insight to the chemical plants in Texas that have been exploding? I saw some orange smoke coming from one. What kind of environmental issues could we possibly get from it.

No insight but the EPA has already said the air around the plant is fine. I'm not sure if Crosby residents have been allowed to return to their homes or not. I believe they were evacuated in a 1 1/2 mile radius of the plant. Most of their area was pretty flooded anyway so I'm not sure how many want to return to their homes quite yet anyway. Crosby is pretty far from the eastern-most Houston suburbs - probably 10 to 15 miles from the nearest ones. The threat was confined to the evacuation zone.


Most of the time with a chemical fire the best course of action both health-wise and environmentally is to let it burn. While the smoke will be an irritant the vast majority of the time it's better than what would happen if you tried to put it out. Depending on the chemical the fire actually reduces the health hazards. Some chemicals have seriously bad reactions to water and with all chemicals however many gallons of water you put on the fire is now additional contamination that you have to try to contain and later cleanup. I read an article on a firefighting site where the plant owner is content to let it burn so he's good with whatever damage the fire does.

A 1 1/2 mile exclusion zone is pretty large and should suffice for just about anything. I know off the top of my head the only facility we responded to that required a larger exclusion zone was a facility that handled medical waste and that was because of the low level radioactive waste they had at times. Unlike most chemicals radioactivity will stick to soot so we had a one mile exclusion zone downwind in case of a fire. We would have fought that fire even knowing we were exposing our crews to radioactivity.

I've heard its anhydrous benzoyl peroxide.

http://www.arkema-americas.com/en/arkema...crosby-tx/

http://www.luperox.com/en/

product safety disclosures here
http://www.luperox.com/en/safety/
(This post was last modified: 09-03-2017 07:19 PM by WoodlandsOwl.)
09-03-2017 07:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mptnstr@44 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,239
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 434
I Root For: Nati Bearcats
Location:
Post: #423
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-03-2017 07:01 PM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/...169740.php

School starts delayed across the area. Some buildings will be closed for the school year. HISD, with nearly 300 schools is still evaluating. They haven't been able to get to about 15 of their school yet. So far, 53 "heavily damaged" and 22 "severely damaged."

As long as half are usable, they can double up school use with two shifts am and pm. Half of the students go 8-1 and the other half go 2-7. It's not ideal but it works.
09-03-2017 08:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Legend
*

Posts: 29,709
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 482
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #424
RE: Hurricane Harvey
Kingwood High School (2700 enrollment) might not be able to open the entire year. The plan for now is to have those students go to Summer Creek (which has like 2400 enrollment). I've been to Summer Creek for a couple of my kids' swim meets, and there is no way in hell they can handle 5100 students.
09-03-2017 08:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,659
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5053
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #425
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-03-2017 08:53 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Kingwood High School (2700 enrollment) might not be able to open the entire year. The plan for now is to have those students go to Summer Creek (which has like 2400 enrollment). I've been to Summer Creek for a couple of my kids' swim meets, and there is no way in hell they can handle 5100 students.

Well it will likely be shifts. HISD was talking about possible shifts and shortening the school day. They haven't figured out exactly what their situation is yet.
09-03-2017 09:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WoodlandsOwl Offline
Up in the Woods
*

Posts: 11,806
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 115
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #426
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-03-2017 08:53 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Kingwood High School (2700 enrollment) might not be able to open the entire year. The plan for now is to have those students go to Summer Creek (which has like 2400 enrollment). I've been to Summer Creek for a couple of my kids' swim meets, and there is no way in hell they can handle 5100 students.

They will have to extend the School Year into July to meet the required number of hours.

"KHS will hold class at Summer Creek High School. The students, faculty and staff of both Kingwood and Summer Creek high schools are asked to submit their preference of two options: Option A will offer a split day, with one high school body attending from 7 to 11:30 every day with the second shift being noon to 4:30 p.m. Option B splits the week, with one school attending Monday, Wednesday and Friday, the other Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday."

http://ourtribune.com/humble-isd/kingwoo...chool.html
09-03-2017 09:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UTSAMarineVet09 Offline
Corporal of the Board.
*

Posts: 16,601
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1332
I Root For: UTSA
Location: West Michigan
Post: #427
Hurricane Harvey
(09-03-2017 08:53 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Kingwood High School (2700 enrollment) might not be able to open the entire year. The plan for now is to have those students go to Summer Creek (which has like 2400 enrollment). I've been to Summer Creek for a couple of my kids' swim meets, and there is no way in hell they can handle 5100 students.

One of the attorneys I work with lives in Kingwood and she had to be evacuated by helo. We are still waiting for her house to be completely out of water so we can go help her with the clean up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
09-03-2017 09:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable

Posts: 25,311
Joined: Apr 2013
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #428
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-03-2017 07:18 PM)WoodlandsOwl Wrote:  
(09-01-2017 10:13 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(09-01-2017 06:23 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  
(09-01-2017 05:49 PM)cb4029 Wrote:  Anybody have any insight to the chemical plants in Texas that have been exploding? I saw some orange smoke coming from one. What kind of environmental issues could we possibly get from it.

No insight but the EPA has already said the air around the plant is fine. I'm not sure if Crosby residents have been allowed to return to their homes or not. I believe they were evacuated in a 1 1/2 mile radius of the plant. Most of their area was pretty flooded anyway so I'm not sure how many want to return to their homes quite yet anyway. Crosby is pretty far from the eastern-most Houston suburbs - probably 10 to 15 miles from the nearest ones. The threat was confined to the evacuation zone.


Most of the time with a chemical fire the best course of action both health-wise and environmentally is to let it burn. While the smoke will be an irritant the vast majority of the time it's better than what would happen if you tried to put it out. Depending on the chemical the fire actually reduces the health hazards. Some chemicals have seriously bad reactions to water and with all chemicals however many gallons of water you put on the fire is now additional contamination that you have to try to contain and later cleanup. I read an article on a firefighting site where the plant owner is content to let it burn so he's good with whatever damage the fire does.

A 1 1/2 mile exclusion zone is pretty large and should suffice for just about anything. I know off the top of my head the only facility we responded to that required a larger exclusion zone was a facility that handled medical waste and that was because of the low level radioactive waste they had at times. Unlike most chemicals radioactivity will stick to soot so we had a one mile exclusion zone downwind in case of a fire. We would have fought that fire even knowing we were exposing our crews to radioactivity.

I've heard its anhydrous benzoyl peroxide.

http://www.arkema-americas.com/en/arkema...crosby-tx/

http://www.luperox.com/en/

product safety disclosures here
http://www.luperox.com/en/safety/

Makes sense. That's a polymerization agent and as an organic peroxide it has violent reactions when it gets contaminated with other chemicals and some organic materials. It'll burn furiously and possibly have some small scale explosions so the fire may seem scary but it's probably the best decision to just let it burn.
09-03-2017 09:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,659
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5053
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #429
RE: Hurricane Harvey
https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-hur...1504220969

"...For many years, those seeking to justify carbon restrictions argued that hurricanes had become more common and intense. That hasn’t happened. Scientific assessments, including those of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.S. government’s latest National Climate Assessment, indicate no long-term increases in the frequency or strength of hurricanes in the U.S. Neither has there been an increase in floods, droughts and tornadoes, though heat waves and heavy precipitation have become more common.
Prior to Harvey, which made landfall as a Category 4 storm, the U.S. had gone a remarkable 12 years without being hit by a hurricane of Category 3 strength or stronger. Since 1970 the U.S. has only seen four hurricanes of Category 4 or 5 strength. In the previous 47 years, the country was struck by 14 such storms. President Obama presided over the lowest rate of hurricane landfalls—0.5 a year—of any president since at least 1900. Eight presidents dealt with more than two a year, but George W. Bush (18 storms) is the only one to have done so since Lyndon B. Johnson. The rest occurred before 1960...."
09-04-2017 02:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,659
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5053
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #430
RE: Hurricane Harvey
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/gr...172004.php

"...Some have been exceptionally catastrophic as is the case with Harvey, but floods are a regular thing in Houston. This list contains several dozen major floods and goes back to the founding of the city. Some of the early examples are only sparsely recorded, but note the regularity of flooding in downtown in particular.

1837: Buffalo Bayou flooded, with four feet of water recorded on Main Street.
1841: Flooding washed out two bridges over Buffalo Bayou.
1853: Buffalo Bayou overflows its banks causing a major flood in downtown.
1875: Buffalo and White Oak Bayous overflow in the aftermath of a hurricane, washing out all bridges except for one.
1879: Buffalo and White Oak Bayous overflow causing major flooding in downtown.
1887: Buffalo Bayou overflows, washing out several bridges downtown.
Records become significantly better in the early 20th century, attesting to a continuation of this pattern in well-documented storms. In addition to the 1935 flood, major flooding inundated downtown in 1913, 1929, and 1932. Flood-mitigation efforts such as the construction of levees and retention ponds lessened the severity of all but the worst storms after 1935, but tropical storms and hurricanes throughout the 20th century revealed Houston's continued vulnerability to storms.

The reasons have to do almost entirely with topography and geography. Houston sits on the Gulf of Mexico in an active hurricane zone that attracts large storms. But more significantly, Houston's topography is extraordinarily flat. The elevation drop across the entire city and region is extremely modest. Most local waterways are slow-moving creeks and bayous that wind their way through town and eventually trickle into the shallow, marshy Trinity Bay. Drainage is slow on a normal day. During a deluge, these systems fill rapidly with water that effectively has nowhere to go.

...Houston's flood problems are a distinctive feature of its topography and geography, and they long predate any sprawl. While steps have been taken over the years to mitigate them and reduce the severity of flooding, a rare but catastrophic event will unavoidably overwhelm even the most sophisticated flood control systems. Harvey was one such event — certainly the highest floodwater event to hit Houston in over 80 years, and possibly the worst deluge in its recorded history. But it is entirely consistent with almost two centuries of recorded historical patterns. In the grander scheme of causes for Harvey's flooding, sprawl does not even meaningfully register."
09-04-2017 04:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Legend
*

Posts: 29,709
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 482
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #431
RE: Hurricane Harvey
I think any new housing development in Houston should feature the type of strict flooding requirements that other cities have. Was it Nashville that requires a 4 foot slab? Master planned communities should have almost as much drainage and retention ponds as land allocated for houses. And levees should be built several feet above the 100 year flood plain, since the 100 year plain is really like a 3-5 year plain now.

I live in Sienna Plantation in Fort Bend County. We have roughly 7700 homes and my conservative estimate is about 100 homes got water in their homes during Harvey. That's not too bad really compared to most spots. We have a 59 and 60 foot levee around the community but parts in the southeast section flooded because they're lower than other sections (54 to 56 feet elevation) and drainage areas next to the levees flooded. We probably had a pump failure too but the community won't admit that due to inevitable litigation issues.

Riverstone - the sister community to our west - probably has half as many homes. But they likely had 1000 or more homes flood. Their elevation is identical to ours. The major difference is they don't have nearly as large of a levee system. I think they're the same height. They just don't have enough of them and there wasn't enough area to hold all that water.

Honestly the sections of Houston in the 100 year flood plain should be razed, and re-built with equal amounts of housing and retention areas. But I doubt that happens. We're talking about maybe 20-25 percent of Harris County and an insane amount of homes.
09-04-2017 07:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mptnstr@44 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,239
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 434
I Root For: Nati Bearcats
Location:
Post: #432
RE: Hurricane Harvey
I have heard that a huge number of the rebuilds of single family homes in Houstonwill need to be underwritten by the US government because while people carried home owner's insurance they did not have riders with their policies to cover floods.

It should be a requirement that a flood rider must be a part of a home insurance policy for any rebuild in Houston. It is inconceivable that people who live on at or below sea level land near a huge body of water like an ocean that has flooded in the past do not have to carry flood insurance.

The US government should rebuild a flooded home once. Repeated rebuilds on the government dime for people who rebuild in areas that flood and don't carry flood insurance is absurd.

Homeowner's insurance is expensive in Kansas because of the possibility of a tornado.
Homeowner's insurance in California requires earthquake coverage because of the possibility of an earthquake.
Why would Houston homes not have a requirement to carry flood insurance???
09-04-2017 08:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Legend
*

Posts: 29,709
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 482
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #433
RE: Hurricane Harvey
If you don't live in a flood plain, you don't need to buy flood insurance. I don't have it because the levee ostensibly protects me and I'm not technically in a flood plain. Of course tell the 100 homes in my community that flooded that they're not in a flood plain, or the 1000 homes in Riverstone.

It's also important to note that we pay a ton of taxes to the LID (which is the Levee Improvement District). I'd have to look it up but it may be $4000 or so combined on about a $200,000 house out here for the annual MUD (utility) and LID taxes. Most folks feel that's their flood insurance. My wife now wants us to get it. Luckily for us, it's not too late.
09-04-2017 09:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 82,008
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3446
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #434
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-04-2017 08:48 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is inconceivable that people who live on at or below sea level land near a huge body of water like an ocean that has flooded in the past do not have to carry flood insurance.

Houston is not at or below sea level. That's New Orleans. Houston is about 40 feet above sea level. But it is very flat, which means that a lot of water sits instead of drains quickly. So the thrust of your comment is on point, just not exactly for the facts as you stated.
09-04-2017 09:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HeartOfDixie Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,572
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 945
I Root For: Alabama
Location: Huntsville AL
Post: #435
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-04-2017 07:53 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I think any new housing development in Houston should feature the type of strict flooding requirements that other cities have. Was it Nashville that requires a 4 foot slab? Master planned communities should have almost as much drainage and retention ponds as land allocated for houses. And levees should be built several feet above the 100 year flood plain, since the 100 year plain is really like a 3-5 year plain now.

I live in Sienna Plantation in Fort Bend County. We have roughly 7700 homes and my conservative estimate is about 100 homes got water in their homes during Harvey. That's not too bad really compared to most spots. We have a 59 and 60 foot levee around the community but parts in the southeast section flooded because they're lower than other sections (54 to 56 feet elevation) and drainage areas next to the levees flooded. We probably had a pump failure too but the community won't admit that due to inevitable litigation issues.

Riverstone - the sister community to our west - probably has half as many homes. But they likely had 1000 or more homes flood. Their elevation is identical to ours. The major difference is they don't have nearly as large of a levee system. I think they're the same height. They just don't have enough of them and there wasn't enough area to hold all that water.

Honestly the sections of Houston in the 100 year flood plain should be razed, and re-built with equal amounts of housing and retention areas. But I doubt that happens. We're talking about maybe 20-25 percent of Harris County and an insane amount of homes.

That would work but it would cost too much and all of the developers would revolt.

You can't outrun a 100+ year storm. Those are just the risks one takes.

If anything, Texas ought to pass a law mandating flood insurance in certain areas.

My house in Blackhorse Ranch was just outside the 100 year flood plane and yet several homes in that section flooded, because the golf course was designed as a giant drainage area and that section was surrounded on three sides by it.
09-04-2017 09:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,659
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5053
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #436
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-04-2017 08:48 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  I have heard that a huge number of the rebuilds of single family homes in Houstonwill need to be underwritten by the US government because while people carried home owner's insurance they did not have riders with their policies to cover floods.

It should be a requirement that a flood rider must be a part of a home insurance policy for any rebuild in Houston. It is inconceivable that people who live on at or below sea level land near a huge body of water like an ocean that has flooded in the past do not have to carry flood insurance.

The US government should rebuild a flooded home once. Repeated rebuilds on the government dime for people who rebuild in areas that flood and don't carry flood insurance is absurd.

Homeowner's insurance is expensive in Kansas because of the possibility of a tornado.
Homeowner's insurance in California requires earthquake coverage because of the possibility of an earthquake.
Why would Houston homes not have a requirement to carry flood insurance???

Houston is not at or below sea level. It is mostly 50-100 feet above. Its creeks and bayous and rivers that had more rainwater than they could handle.

In places where there have been repeated floods, they have bought out the homes. Think it was called Brownwood in Baytown was completely bought out in the 70s. There have been other areas.

Many homes in the 100 year flood plain didn't flood and most of the ones in the 500 year flood plain didn't flood. Don't think there has been flooding in the houses in West University since the 90s, despite Allison, Ike and Harvey and many parts are in the 100 year flood plain and most of the rest is in the 500. Many houses elsewhwere outside the flood plain did flood this time.

There does need to be some serious thought about what to do with those homes in the 100 year flood plain, which seems to be expanding with each iteration of the flood maps.
09-04-2017 11:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
C2__ Offline
Caltex2
*

Posts: 24,228
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 599
I Root For: Houston, PVAMU
Location: League City, TX
Post: #437
RE: Hurricane Harvey
They need to turn some of these subdivisions into parks and golf courses. There's no reason to keep rebuilding and refunding people whose homes flood repeatedly. Don't let people live too close to creeks, bayous and rivers, period. If they already live close, they're grandfathered in until the next couple of floods.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2017 10:24 PM by C2__.)
09-05-2017 12:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 83,659
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 5053
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #438
RE: Hurricane Harvey
(09-04-2017 07:53 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I think any new housing development in Houston should feature the type of strict flooding requirements that other cities have. Was it Nashville that requires a 4 foot slab? Master planned communities should have almost as much drainage and retention ponds as land allocated for houses. And levees should be built several feet above the 100 year flood plain, since the 100 year plain is really like a 3-5 year plain now.

I live in Sienna Plantation in Fort Bend County. We have roughly 7700 homes and my conservative estimate is about 100 homes got water in their homes during Harvey. That's not too bad really compared to most spots. We have a 59 and 60 foot levee around the community but parts in the southeast section flooded because they're lower than other sections (54 to 56 feet elevation) and drainage areas next to the levees flooded. We probably had a pump failure too but the community won't admit that due to inevitable litigation issues.

Riverstone - the sister community to our west - probably has half as many homes. But they likely had 1000 or more homes flood. Their elevation is identical to ours. The major difference is they don't have nearly as large of a levee system. I think they're the same height. They just don't have enough of them and there wasn't enough area to hold all that water.

Honestly the sections of Houston in the 100 year flood plain should be razed, and re-built with equal amounts of housing and retention areas. But I doubt that happens. We're talking about maybe 20-25 percent of Harris County and an insane amount of homes.

If you are going to raze all the 100 year flood plain houses, Most of Meyerland and Bellaire would get razed along with a significant chunk of West U. and the Memorial Villages. Don't think that flies. It is kind of crazy to build right next to Addicks, though.
09-05-2017 07:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mptnstr@44 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,239
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 434
I Root For: Nati Bearcats
Location:
Post: #439
Hurricane Harvey
(09-05-2017 12:05 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  They need to turn some of these subdivisions into parks and golf courses. There's no reason to keep rebuilding and refunding people whose homes flood repeateday. Don't let people live too close to creeks, bayous and rivers, period. If they already live close, they're grandfathered in until the next couple of floods.

Or if you want to live near bodies of water ocean, rivers, etc you must carry flood insurance so you mitigate the risk.

In Ohio we have people that get flooded fairly regularly along the Ohio, they rebuild on the us dime and get flooded again and rebuild again. If you want to live in areas that can flood carry flood insurance.
09-05-2017 07:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mptnstr@44 Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,239
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 434
I Root For: Nati Bearcats
Location:
Post: #440
Hurricane Harvey
(09-05-2017 07:01 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(09-04-2017 07:53 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I think any new housing development in Houston should feature the type of strict flooding requirements that other cities have. Was it Nashville that requires a 4 foot slab? Master planned communities should have almost as much drainage and retention ponds as land allocated for houses. And levees should be built several feet above the 100 year flood plain, since the 100 year plain is really like a 3-5 year plain now.

I live in Sienna Plantation in Fort Bend County. We have roughly 7700 homes and my conservative estimate is about 100 homes got water in their homes during Harvey. That's not too bad really compared to most spots. We have a 59 and 60 foot levee around the community but parts in the southeast section flooded because they're lower than other sections (54 to 56 feet elevation) and drainage areas next to the levees flooded. We probably had a pump failure too but the community won't admit that due to inevitable litigation issues.

Riverstone - the sister community to our west - probably has half as many homes. But they likely had 1000 or more homes flood. Their elevation is identical to ours. The major difference is they don't have nearly as large of a levee system. I think they're the same height. They just don't have enough of them and there wasn't enough area to hold all that water.

Honestly the sections of Houston in the 100 year flood plain should be razed, and re-built with equal amounts of housing and retention areas. But I doubt that happens. We're talking about maybe 20-25 percent of Harris County and an insane amount of homes.

If you are going to raze all the 100 year flood plain houses, Most of Meyerland and Bellaire would get razed along with a significant chunk of West U. and the Memorial Villages. Don't think that flies. It is kind of crazy to build right next to Addicks, though.

Rebuilding in those areas should mandate homeowners, developer and renters carry flood riders in their insurance policies. It is that simple.
09-05-2017 07:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2026 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2026 MyBB Group.