Jump to content

I-10 Construction To Prevent Catastrophic Flooding 2011


J008

Recommended Posts

It has been a while, but I seem to remember some discussion that TxDOT was short on the drainage detention they needed to mitigate the increase cover from the new feeder.  TxDOT was looking at another site for detention on the south side of I-10, but the environmental issues could not be overcome.  Anyone remember this? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember discussions from when they were submerging 59 near montrose, that part of the reason was to flood if needed.

Property (vehicular) damage is a better outcome than Property (real) damage.

I imagine I-10 was deisigned the same way.   Yes, adding detention ponds are meant to give floods somethign to fill up first and help the overall situation but ultimately, losing a few hundred cars on 10 and 59 is way cheaper than flooding in the Heights, Washington Cooridor, Montrose, and the Musuem District

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember discussions from when they were submerging 59 near montrose, that part of the reason was to flood if needed.

Property (vehicular) damage is a better outcome than Property (real) damage.

I imagine I-10 was deisigned the same way.   Yes, adding detention ponds are meant to give floods somethign to fill up first and help the overall situation but ultimately, losing a few hundred cars on 10 and 59 is way cheaper than flooding in the Heights, Washington Cooridor, Montrose, and the Musuem District

 

I honestly think they should bury most of the freeways for this purpose! They can act as emergency flood control!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to I-10 Construction To Prevent Catastrophic Flooding 2011

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...