Calgary and Area Flood Thread

[Bigtime]

I was always of the belief proposals like the tunnel and Springbank dam would be to protect the downtown core primarily. Having it shut down for any length of time is just not good from an economic standpoint. The fact that some homes along the river benefit is just incidental.

[stazzy33]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

I was always of the belief proposals like the tunnel and Springbank dam would be to protect the downtown core primarily. Having it shut down for any length of time is just not good from an economic standpoint. The fact that some homes along the river benefit is just incidental.

The issue with that is the dam or tunnel would only affect flows downstream of the Elbow, while I believe most of the flooding of downtown could be attributed to the Bow. Whether or not the additional flow from the Elbow caused the Bow to overtop its banks due to a backwater effect is another story. I can't seem to find any indication that these projects would reduce flooding on the Bow.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

A couple of interesting opinion pieces from Maclean's:

It's time we stopped paying for your river view.

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/i...ur-river-view/

I had no idea we took the title. Crazy.

The 2013 flood in Calgary cost $5 billion, making it the single most costly natural disaster in Canadian history.

[Bigtime]

We're number one! We're number one!

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I had no idea we took the title. Crazy.

Interesting, I thought Ft Mac took the title.

According to Wikipedia;

By July 7, 2016, the Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC) and Catastrophe Indices and Quantification Inc. (CatIQ) reported that insured damage was estimated to have reached $3.58 billion,[77] making the wildfire the most expensive disaster in Canadian history, surpassing the 1998 ice storms in Quebec ($1.9 billion) and the 2013 Alberta floods ($1.8 billion)

Are they using a different metric to get that 5B figure?

[Fuzz]

Insured damage vs total(including municipal, which I assume is uninsured?)

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Insured damage vs total(including municipal, which I assume is uninsured?)

Could be.

Interesting study from MacEwan. I'd have to think using the same metrics the 2013 flood wouldn't ring in as high.

A new report from MacEwan University estimates the total cost of the wildfire will surpass $8.86 billion.

The study calculates the impact of the disaster on all levels, including financial, physical and social factors.


Though their research attempts to provide the most cumulative picture to date, it may be years — even decades — before the full cost of the wildfire is fully calculated, study co-author Rafat Alam said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...says-1.3939953

[calgarygeologist]

Global News is reporting that the city has issued a high water flow advisory for the Bow river. Flow rates are the highest they have been in two years due to increased melt water and runoff from upsteam. No flooding is expected at this point in time in the Calgary region though.

[Bigtime]

Flow is approaching 300 m3/s today:

http://www.environment.alberta.ca/ap...ionID=RBOWCALG

The 10th Street wave surfers should love it though.

We're gonna hold at Floodtron 4.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Flow is approaching 300 m3/s today:

http://www.environment.alberta.ca/ap...ionID=RBOWCALG

The 10th Street wave surfers should love it though.

We're gonna hold at Floodtron 4.

I walk by the surf wave every day, it was looking pretty weak this morning. I don't know if the increased flow makes it a little less pronounced or something.

Also the Calgary fire and rescue guys were chilling there with their boat and guys in the water yesterday afternoon.

[Otto-matic]

If you’re planning to head out onto the Bow River sometime soon, city officials advise caution as the water flow is much higher than average.
The Calgary Fire Department says the current flow rate is 293 cubic metres per second, driven in particular by mountain runoff. That’s a higher rate than what’s been seen in the past two years.
“Melting snow in the mountains is causing very cold water temperatures, increased floating debris and high turbidity in the Bow River, which makes for very poor visibility and dangerous conditions,” said Carol Henke, public information officer with the CFD.
Crews will be monitoring the water while the advisory is in place and asks that residents avoid the area until conditions improve.

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/officials-...iver-1.3439618

[Lubicon]

It certainly seemed to be running high last night, guess it wasn't my imagination.

[Manhattanboy]

I see the federal department is now "Environment and Climate Change Canada".

Ah the work of toiling civil servants at the expense of taxpayers never ends.

And it GMG that we put "Canada" at the end of department names (Parks Canada, Hockey Canada etc.) as though French is the new English. What a country.

[TheScorpion]

My home was destroyed in the 2013 floods, and we've spent the four years since working our asses off to fix the house and raise it up so it isn't impacted as much by a possible flood. The house should be done by late summer.

Let me have this, river. Don't do this.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

My home was destroyed in the 2013 floods, and we've spent the four years since working our asses off to fix the house and raise it up so it isn't impacted as much by a possible flood. The house should be done by late summer.

Let me have this, river. Don't do this.

I feel like this is a good thing. If we're getting significant melting and increased flow without the combination of a lot of rain, it's going to help if there's an eventual rain event like in 2013. Get that snowpack outta there before the rain starts hammering on top of it, which is what caused the last flood.

Granted, I'm no expert, so who knows.

Also, 2013 peaked at 1800m/s. Cresting 300 doesn't seem that rare. It's happened in 2007, 2008, 2011, 2012 and 2014 in the last decade alone.

[para transit fellow]

I see that the Holy Cross centre has put in there flood protection material on the 1st Avenue side.

Another sign that the season is upon us it that I am again having weird irrational dreams of trying mitigate damage as water is rising in my kitchen

(I was one block outside of the 2013 damage area in Mission)

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by nik-

I feel like this is a good thing. If we're getting significant melting and increased flow without the combination of a lot of rain, it's going to help if there's an eventual rain event like in 2013. Get that snowpack outta there before the rain starts hammering on top of it, which is what caused the last flood.

Granted, I'm no expert, so who knows.

Also, 2013 peaked at 1800m/s. Cresting 300 doesn't seem that rare. It's happened in 2007, 2008, 2011, 2012 and 2014 in the last decade alone.

Totally anecdotal but flew to Vancouver last week. Man there is a dump load of snow on both sides of the devide. May never have noticed it before but the volume was staggering.

A slow melt would be great. All that mixed with heavy rain would have me very very nervous.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

And it GMG that we put "Canada" at the end of department names (Parks Canada, Hockey Canada etc.) as though French is the new English. What a country.

I mean, we aren't the only country to do that:

Parks Australia https://parksaustralia.gov.au/
Tourism Ireland https://www.tourismireland.com/
Tourism Australia http://www.tourism.australia.com/
Tourism New Zealand http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/

Just kind of makes sense to put the department name first when you're a government agency. In Hockey Canada's case they aren't really a department but sometimes the other way just sounds weird (Canada Snowboard is the sport governing body because Snowboard Canada was already a magazine).

[troutman]

It’s time we stopped paying for your river view

Flooding is predictable and increasingly common, and the government needs to halt its huge bailouts of oblivious homeowners

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/i...ur-river-view/

Buyer Beware?

My parents had a hard time selling a beautiful property, on a flood plain. Price was reduced quite a bit to account for flood risk. Maybe the market will push people out of flood plains.

[foshizzle11]

I kind of agree with that article troutman, if you live near a river, you should expect to have a flood once in a while. I don't think cities should continue to allow people to go back to their homes that are completely destroyed by a flood and rebuild. This just seems a bit nuts to me. We live close enough to the river to enjoy it (ie up on a ridge, 15 minute walk) but we never would dream of building our house near one. Maybe a vacation property or a trailer or something, sure. It isn't everything we love and want to protect necessarily.

Why should my house insurance increase in cost when we rarely ever make claims and why should I have forced to buy flood insurance why I don't have a basement and if the Bow flooded enough for our house to flood on the main floor, this whole city would be wiped away.

Those who have the chance of being flooded (ie within 100 year flood boundary) should have to have flood insurance. Those who are river side (like in Mission along the Elbow) within a city like Calgary, should pay a lot more than us who don't need it.

I think the city should maybe reconsider rezoning some of these areas that are prone to flooding annually.