Flooding: exactly how much property is under water??? (Cary, Earl: cheap apartments, insurance)

[anifani821]

Originally Posted by The Native 1

I live very near these apartments in Chantilly neighborhood. The Doral side has already been sold to the city. I know they were already tearing out the pool and moving out some of the tenants in the past few weeks. The city is supposed to turn this area into a greenway within the next year. This morning when I awoke I looked out my window to see a car underwater not more than a few hundred feet from my house....SCARY! This area has always been known for flooding. I feel sorry for some of the tenants living there.

Well, Native, you answered some of my questions!!!

I would have freaked had I looked out and seen a car floating around!

Is everything okay at your place???

[The Native 1]

Originally Posted by anifani821

Well, Native, you answered some of my questions!!!

I would have freaked had I looked out and seen a car floating around!

Is everything okay at your place???

Yeah everythings fine at my place. Thanks for asking. Luckily I am up on the very high side of the street so it would probably have to rain like it has for a few days in a row before it affected me. At the time I saw the car floating I was very concerned. My wife was trying to make light of the situation by suggesting that now would be a good time to try out my kayak I just purchased. LOL

[Metallisteve]

Originally Posted by anifani821

...Anyone have some really good info or insight into why we are continuing to have such big problems w/ run-off and creeks????

It's called disregard for storm water management for decades. The mentality of "push it on downstream or to your neighbor" works for rural areas...not metro regions like Charlotte. Developers are allowed to pave acres and acres with little to no storm water management (i.e. larger pipe systems to handle these storms and/or retention ponds to help reduce the extra runoff). Only recently have we started instituting some ordinances for new construction in certain watersheds (called Post Construction Control Ordinances)...but it is very little compared to what should be done in some places.

In other areas, like Sugar Creek, the area is relatively old and never had a chance to get a storm drainage system installed (they just didn't think about that stuff back in the day--"water flows downhill" was the guiding principle). That's where it costs million of dollars to analyze, design, and retrofit/upgrade a neighborhood with a system that actually works and prevents flooding that was seen today.

The reason the creeks are usually the center of attention during a flood is simple: that's where every drop of water that doesn't soak into the ground tries to get to (and eventually does). The creek was formed hundreds of years ago to handle what was an undeveloped rural area. We've added hundreds of thousands of square feet of impervious areas to each stream's watershed, and expected the streams to keep up with it! What makes matters worse is when folks don't take the minimal amount of due diligence time to see if they are in a flood-prone area (not FEMA flood zone, just an area in general that is not FEMA-related that could potentially flood) before building. It happens far more often than you'd ever guess...and it happens everywhere...even in the ritzy "knock'em-down-build'em-back-bigger" neighborhoods in the Queens-type areas.

It's shameful that we flood in a measly 25 year storm (that's what most of the region saw...the equivalent of a storm that statistically we won't see but once every 25 years) as badly as we do. This is why that "storm water fee" is on your utility bill...it's there to fund the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Storm Water Services who are tasked with alleviating these problems over time...each one costing $5-10 million, taking about 3-5 years, and a grand total of well over a couple hundred unique areas.

[Metallisteve]

Originally Posted by CouponJack

This is a perfect example of why collection of "runoff" water should be a bigger priority. (ie build reseviors).


Think about all the water that was running down your street which could've been used for irrigation purposes, or drinking water etc........again, we (USA) waste so much water when it could be put to good use. That's why IMO we should never be in a "drought" so to speak if we did things the right way...

This is a good thought Jack, but it's largely impractical. Number one, where are you going to put these reservoirs? Number two, how do you get the water there? Once you get the water there, it's going to be so full of yuck (lawn fertilizers, road runoff, animal feces, etc.) that you'll have to treat it somehow, which costs moo-lah--typically in the form of electricity.

Folks can certainly build smaller private rainwater collection vats on their property, but even then, their land must be sloped a certain way, and there is an upkeep on the vats themselves. If you let the water sit, it becomes stagnant and unhealthy, spawning mosquitoes. Additionally, they are VERY expensive (on the order of a few thousand dollars for a basic installation), making them an automatic deal-breaker for a typical home owner.

Again, good thoughts, but you can't be so wide-sweeping and generalistic. There are certainly methods to help both alleviate flooding and conserve water, but they are very much a case-by-case basis limited by real estate and greenbacks...two things we humans go to war (or court) for.

[anifani821]

Steve - I so enjoy your posts!!!! Nice to get some good info about how things really work . . . cause for laymen like me - I often feel that situations are not being addressed . . .

I do wonder why we have not engineered things better. Yes, I know what you meant about set-backs, and legal issues . . . but still . . . seems more could be done, even in my neighborhood, for example. We don't have flooding but we nearly have flooding. The creeks top off for periods of time . . . we all have flood plains at the back (we are on a slope so no chance of this affecting our homes). I see all the creeks filling up and think - well - make them bigger, LOL. I foresee the time when that creek COULD flood, so why not widen it NOW?

I know what you mean about nasty, contaminated run-off water . . . but it seems CLT is way behind the 8 ball on taking care of water issues here.

My DH and I looked into doing a pond on our property but we got discouraged when we realized how complicated it was going to be. We wanted to lower our sewer bill and thought creating a pond would be a good way of doing that. Well, it would be a big deal to implement and get inspected, etc. just to save $30 a month, LOL.

[Doorway]

Originally Posted by CouponJack

This is a perfect example of why collection of "runoff" water should be a bigger priority. (ie build reseviors).


Think about all the water that was running down your street which could've been used for irrigation purposes, or drinking water etc........again, we (USA) waste so much water when it could be put to good use. That's why IMO we should never be in a "drought" so to speak if we did things the right way...


ok, now I'll get off my soapbox..

I couldn't agree with you more. I also think the utilities should have no more than 6 hours to fix a broken pipe that is spewing water all over the street. After that , they should be fined by the minute. I'll dismount soapbox now as well.

[Metallisteve]

Originally Posted by anifani821

...We don't have flooding but we nearly have flooding.

Then the creek is doing it's job! Seriously though, you're in far better shape than a lot of other folks who live on a stream/creek in our region...just watch the news tonight to see!

Originally Posted by anifani821

The creeks top off for periods of time . . . we all have flood plains at the back (we are on a slope so no chance of this affecting our homes).

This sounds like a healthy stream then if it's got what's called "floodplain connection," meaning that it has the ability to come out of its normal banks and flood a broad but shallow area (and hopefully, not cause any property damage, but the stream could obviously not care less about property!).

Originally Posted by anifani821

I see all the creeks filling up and think - well - make them bigger, LOL. I foresee the time when that creek COULD flood, so why not widen it NOW?

Reasonable thought...but here are a few things to chew on:
1. Go knock on your neighbor's doors and ask if they'd be willing to donate an easement to allow for this widening. Betcha more than half tell you where to go! Thus, the cost of that project just went up...way up!
2. Making the stream bigger isn't always the solution. In fact, that floodplain we talked about is a real key to a successful healthy stream...and keeping humans out of it is the challenge!
3. As I mentioned, Charlotte is and will be playing catch-up for a loooong time to alleviate areas with inadequate drainage. That means proactive improvements like this are a thing of the distant future, if at all. Remember that streams are nearly always a wildlife/critter habitat and the state regulatory agencies don't like you fettering with them unless they need fettering! Basically, that means until it floods and does some damage or is in really bad eroding shape, it more than likely won't be getting any work done to it.

Originally Posted by anifani821

I know what you mean about nasty, contaminated run-off water . . . but it seems CLT is way behind the 8 ball on taking care of water issues here.

How about "off of the pool table altogether" for a better description than "behind the 8 ball"!

Originally Posted by anifani821

My DH and I looked into doing a pond on our property but we got discouraged when we realized how complicated it was going to be. We wanted to lower our sewer bill and thought creating a pond would be a good way of doing that. Well, it would be a big deal to implement and get inspected, etc. just to save $30 a month, LOL.

You must have a fairly large house to be worried about lowering your storm water bill (assuming that's what you meant be lowering your sewer bill...since storm water is on your utility bill). Even so, the cost of designing, building, and maintaining a pond (let's say $300k for a VERY small and simple pond) would be so great that you'd have to live in your house for about 1,200 years for it to make financial sense! Now, doing it out of interest for the environment (this is assuming you've got some sort of sediment or pollutant runoff problem to being with, otherwise you're just impeding the natural flow of relatively clean water) is another story and cannot and should not be related to financial sense!

[anifani821]

Thank you for the info, Steve! Everything you wrote makes total sense. Yes, the pond was an idea for the natural habitat situation in our back yard. No, we don't live in a huge house, lol and no, we don't have acreage. Just a little over 1/2 acre. But we thought w/ our slope, we could make a nice pond that then would connect to the creek, perhaps . . . we envisioned a little bridge . . .to a gazebo. We wanted to turn most of the back into a pond, w/ different berms and rocks around it. We had read where this could affect how our sewer charges are calculated, so that was a side benefit (we initially thought, LOL). We had not gathered enuff info to really understand what was involved.

At this point, I think the closest we will get to a pond is a small, decorative one w/ a little pump to circulate the water, LOL!!!!

I would donate easement and I think at least most of my neighbors would, as well, but that is b/c we all have deep lots and no one is using their back space where the creek is, except for some landscaping. However, I think our situation is not typical. Some of our neighbors also get out and clean out our creek when limbs fall in it. However, a builder had laborers drag some trees he felled into the creek when we first moved here and that is a mess. I think if everyone would be responsible w/ keeping their areas of a creek cleared out, this would also help the overall situation for everyone.

[CouponJack]

Originally Posted by Metallisteve

This is a good thought Jack, but it's largely impractical. Number one, where are you going to put these reservoirs? Number two, how do you get the water there? Once you get the water there, it's going to be so full of yuck (lawn fertilizers, road runoff, animal feces, etc.) that you'll have to treat it somehow, which costs moo-lah--typically in the form of electricity.

Folks can certainly build smaller private rainwater collection vats on their property, but even then, their land must be sloped a certain way, and there is an upkeep on the vats themselves. If you let the water sit, it becomes stagnant and unhealthy, spawning mosquitoes. Additionally, they are VERY expensive (on the order of a few thousand dollars for a basic installation), making them an automatic deal-breaker for a typical home owner.

Again, good thoughts, but you can't be so wide-sweeping and generalistic. There are certainly methods to help both alleviate flooding and conserve water, but they are very much a case-by-case basis limited by real estate and greenbacks...two things we humans go to war (or court) for.

How am I being wide-sweeping and generalistic? I'm just telling people what is obvious to most. We as a society waste the most precious resource we have.

I understand building and maintaining a reservoir is time-consuming and expensive, but its been done in other parts of the country recently with very good LONG TERM results. I really wonder if anyone from the state has given any serious consideration to this.

How about rain barrells? 99.999% of homes do not have one.

Look, I'm all over the map here and I'm not smart enough to figure out how to solve these problems, but all I know is that there was a river of water flowing down my street last night (along w/a million other streets in the area) where the water just ranoff.....its not like we're in parts of the southwest where they only get 5-10 inches of rain a year....

Its really a shame.

[Metallisteve]

Ani, you hit a good point about keeping streams/creeks clean and debris out of them! People don't realize what just a small accumulation of simple leafs can do to the flow of a stream.

The storm water fee reduction for ponds on site is mainly intended for commercial properties or other properties that have a large footprint of impervious and therefore generate a lot of storm water fees. Installing a pond theoretically reduces that site's impact on the surrounding environment (both flow-wise and pollution-wise), and therefore would conceivable need less service form the storm water department.

The pond I was referring to in my quick-and-dirty cost example is a full-blown "real" storm water pond...not a landscape feature. The difference is (#1) form vs. function and (#2) design intensity. Obviously, landscaping ponds do absolutely nothing for storm water management (and actually may slightly increase runoff from a site during higher rainfalls by reducing the amount of pervious land on the property).