The Houston Gang

I think floods would only be easier than a fire if as many homes caught fire as those that flooded. A fire typically is an isolated case a flood affects the community and takes months to repair, as materials become available and mold inspectors certify weeks after the water has gone down. And with a flood finding some where else to live becomes an issue as most hotels are filled quickly. Grocery stores are closed along with gas stations for days if not weeks.

He's not talking about a residential flood. He's talking industrial. In case of most industrial (and even commercial ) properties, a flood is a lot less devastating than a fire - and a WHOLE LOT less devestating than a flood of the same magnatude in a residential area.

Depends on circumstances and I speak from limited experience so blanket statements not implied Our flood was only 14 inches so some motors had to be dried and bearings replaced. We knew it was coming so we moved a lot of stuff off the floor. Some loss of raw materials on lower part of a pallet. Had it been higher, machine control panels would have been damaged. We were down for only 3 days.

Two fires, fifteen years apart with two different companies. Both were

Flood cost was about $100,000, fire cost exceeded $2 million. Good insurance, including business interruption insurance.

If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.

Up here in the Grand River watershed ANYTHING you do in the "flood plane" needs approval from the GRCA - the Grand River Conservation Authority.

Sorry, I was speaking more in context with the thread.

No need for "zoning" at all. Just stop subsidizing flood insurance. If you want to build below sea level, have at it.

Much of the flooding in the Houston area was 100' above sea level. Elevation does not guarantee against flooding. Our home is at 98'. Water only came up over our curb. Homes 1 mile north of us are are at 100' and had 18" of water in their homes.

Yet, they built houses in a "reservoir" (barker/addicks), right?

'Those homes should probably never have been built. Now they'll be flooded for quite some time: "Homes upstream will be impacted for an extended period of time while water is released from the reservoirs," the Corps wrote in a press release. The reservoirs will take between one to three months to drain.'

a pail on top of a table will hold more water than a saucer on the floor -- It's more terrain than altitude.

That said, most of Waterloo amd Kitchener and all of Bridgeport would be under water before water came over the kurb here - - -

Absolutely true!

Actually the water in the Barker reservoir are already high and dry again so to speak and have been for about 5 days.

It is shocking that we have had major flooding in the Houston area for the last 3 years. Those in the reservoir saw flooding almost reach their homes in the past couple of years. 5 in 6 still chose to not buy flood insurance and are blaming the government for this and think they should have been told that this would happen. They are blaming the engineers for not opening the flood gates earlier. The reservoir filled in 2 days, it was in its normal state of "empty". And as you mentioned above it will take months to drain from that flood gate. They refuse to understand that it is no one's fault except for the developers, builders, realtors, and ultimate themselves for being ignorant about where their homes were built. They are under the assumption that if you are not required to buy flood insurance your home will not flood. I have explained to them time and again that the mortgage companies may require flood insurance to protect their investment. Pay cash for your home and you don't have to pay for any insurance at all.

But the comment I made refers to any elevation. If there is an issue with the drains, high elevations can flood.

Exactly! And yet some believe that altitude is the determining factor.

should have said the houses vs the water.