J008 Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 Thought I would share this from the Chroncile back in 2011 as the rationale for all the new feeder roads and interstate access. I didn't witness it, but on the radio I heard I-10 was closed at Taylor and traffic was being diverted to Washington and Heights. http://www.chron.com/news/article/Project-to-slow-I-10-flooding-1690975.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avossos Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 So... All those millions and it didn't help one bit? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 I mean, it's not like every storm is going to be like the one last night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway6 Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 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! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.