[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.