Out of all the TX cities, why does it seem like Houston always gets... (Dallas: tornadoes, earthquake)

[gwarnecke]

Houston may have gotten more than its share of natural disasters as of late, but on the other hand - it is still lush and green for most of the year, whereas every decade seems to bring more, longer, and harsher droughts to central Texas (which isn't immune from natural disasters either - my hometown near San Antonio was badly flooded in 1998 and again in 2002, although *touch wood* they haven't had any severe flooding since).

[ParaguaneroSwag]

I would respect your post more if you didn’t say Houston gets hit more with below freezing temperatures than the rest of the state.

Hurricanes are due to position, it’s the only coastal major city. And it’s the Eastern most. Obviously Florida gets the most hurricanes in the country being the most Accessible to their paths. Houston is not only coastal but also the eastern most of the Texas coast. As a result, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama get a lot more than Houston.

Flooding is mainly due to poor urban planning. And ironically, Dallas has pretty poor urban planning too which is why you also see floods happen there. Were Dallas to not build homes in flood plains, they’d be way ahead of the curve. But they’re still far ahead as compared to Houston in this regard, Houston didn’t properly start investing in better infrastructure until after Harvey. Dallas began taking their problem seriously long before.

What Texas in general needs to do is buy flooded properties and turn it into green space.

[ParaguaneroSwag]

Originally Posted by elnina

While much of Houston’s elevated natural disaster risk level can be attributed to its geography and proximity to the Gulf of Mexico, the ongoing effects of climate change and decades of ill-informed planning also play a significant role.(rapid growth/urban sprawl and paving, paving, paving...)
https://hazards.colorado.edu/news/re...le-to-flooding

This too. And this is why natural disasters worldwide are increasing

[oceangaia]

Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag

Flooding is mainly due to poor urban planning. And ironically, Dallas has pretty poor urban planning too which is why you also see floods happen there. Were Dallas to not build homes in flood plains, they’d be way ahead of the curve. But they’re still far ahead as compared to Houston in this regard, Houston didn’t properly start investing in better infrastructure until after Harvey. Dallas began taking their problem seriously long before.

There's not a city in the nation that can handle the rainfalls that Houston gets. Jack is right, Houston floods because it gets insane amounts of rain. Dallas' all-time record rainfall in a day was 6.9 inches. Houston has blown that away many times. In Allison, we were getting 5 inches PER HOUR for a few hours. I looked outside and houses had waterfalls coming off the roof.

[ParaguaneroSwag]

Originally Posted by oceangaia

There's not a city in the nation that can handle the rainfalls that Houston gets. Jack is right, Houston floods because it gets insane amounts of rain. Dallas' all-time record rainfall in a day was 6.9 inches. Houston has blown that away many times. In Allison, we were getting 5 inches PER HOUR for a few hours. I looked outside and houses had waterfalls coming off the roof.

Except for the fact that there are Rainer major cities that still do a better job. Miami is rainier than Houston as well as being coastal, swampy and at sea level, and additionally, they’re right on the coast (yes, Houston is also coastal, but central Miami is directly on the coat).

Now don’t get me wrong, Miami also has a major flood problem particularly the last few years. But they still do a better job of working around it than Houston (Atleast for now). So in a sense, you’re right that no matter how well you prepare, you won’t fix everything. But you can do your best to prepare and lower the risks in the process, and that’s not the point we are in just yet. So I don’t agree at all with what you’re saying.

[ParaguaneroSwag]

Originally Posted by Jack Lance

Was it Nashville that flooded lately or someplace else, anyway, I was watching the reports and they said this catastrophic flooding was the result of "7" inches of rain over the last 2 days. I thought to myself 7 inches of rain over 2 days wouldn't even get a car wet in Houston. So all these claims that its the topography or the lack of planning is absurd is really is all about the rainfall amounts.

Just to let you know it looks like we've had about half the usual amount of rainfall this year.

Except that’s That’s not how it works at all. Every city in the world plans for whatever natural disaster they have SPECIFICALLY. Nashville doesn’t get the amount of rainfall Houston gets, so they don’t need the system here with such as Addicks Resevoir and company, nor Miami’s Everglades and company to prepare. Were Nashville to see similar levels of rainfall consistently the way Houston and Miami do, they would also be more prepared for it.

In reverse, buildings on the west coast are all structured with the idea that an earthquake can creep up at any time. Therefore we’re Houston to get a California level earthquake, the damage here would be far superior to that in San Francisco.

AND MOST OBVIOUS EXAMPLE OF ALL, if a winter storm goes through Texas, the piping and infrastructure isn’t built the way the Midwest is. Therefore, were an arctic blast to ever go through Texas, you would see more busted pipes than the damage an equivalent blast would see in the Midwest.... oh wait...

It’s not that Houston has NO planning... there’s a bayou system and resevoir calacity for a reason. But it’s not up to date with the 7+ million people living in Houston. It’s finally being updated, yes but it’s a working process and it won’t be overnight. And anyone who thinks houses in flood plains aren’t a problem... well, nothing else needed said. Urban planning has definitely been a problem in Houston.

[mkwensky]

Originally Posted by Htown2013

If you can deal with the humidity, the immediate coast of Texas, from Galveston, to Port Aransas/Rockport, to South Padre/Port Isabel doesn't have that bad of a climate.

It's not the humidity that's bad, but the lack of most city amenities and general run-downness of this area that are hard to deal with.

[kemahkami]

Originally Posted by Chanteuse d' Opéra

hit with natural disasters (below freezing temps *although that did occur statewide*) floods, torrential downpours, I feel like Houston always bears the brunt of this

Well, the concept of a "natural disaster" is indeed somewhat relative. Media goes abuzz with pandemonium and chaos when places like SoCal and Arizona receive what would be typical run-of-the-mill rainstorms in the Eastern US. The winter event Texas experienced earlier this Feb reflects what a huge bulk of this country and continent deals with on a more regular basis. Of course, as some posters mentioned earlier, the factor of climate change will ensure that no one area will have the corner on wild weather swings relative to norms - the stories will only repeat themselves in increasing frequency as the process wears on.

As far as Houston "bearing the brunt" of natural disasters compared to other Texas cities, that is mainly just heavy rainfall events along with the associated flooding. Which isn't an issue for me at all, as I like the tropical-form downpours. The vast majority of Texas is too dry for my liking.

Originally Posted by Htown2013

Pick your poison. Dallas may not flood or get as many hurricanes/torrential downpours as Houston, but they get cold and freeze much more than Houston. They have frequent ice storms in winter, much more severe thunderstorms with tornadoes and hail, and get much hotter in the summer, with many days above 100.

Originally Posted by gwarnecke

Houston may have gotten more than its share of natural disasters as of late, but on the other hand - it is still lush and green for most of the year, whereas every decade seems to bring more, longer, and harsher droughts to central Texas (which isn't immune from natural disasters either - my hometown near San Antonio was badly flooded in 1998 and again in 2002, although *touch wood* they haven't had any severe flooding since).

Indeed. To be quite honest, I find Greater Houston and the Golden Triangle to be overall equable areas relative to the rest of the state - well-watered, lush settings with overall mild winters. The lower RGV is too deficient in rainfall for my liking overall, but I'll give the area props for having the mildest winters statewide. Otherwise, the rest of Texas gets either too hot in summer, too cold in winter, too dry overall in climate, too overly continental in influence, or a combination of all. I also find similar issues when looking at the US climate as a whole. The only true improvement is Miami and South Florida.

[oceangaia]

Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag

Except for the fact that there are Rainer major cities that still do a better job. Miami is rainier than Houston as well as being coastal, swampy and at sea level, and additionally, they’re right on the coast (yes, Houston is also coastal, but central Miami is directly on the coat).

Now don’t get me wrong, Miami also has a major flood problem particularly the last few years. But they still do a better job of working around it than Houston (Atleast for now). So in a sense, you’re right that no matter how well you prepare, you won’t fix everything. But you can do your best to prepare and lower the risks in the process, and that’s not the point we are in just yet. So I don’t agree at all with what you’re saying.

So you're motto is "if you're not first, you're last"?

[Redlionjr]

Originally Posted by elnina

While much of Houston’s elevated natural disaster risk level can be attributed to its geography and proximity to the Gulf of Mexico, the ongoing effects of climate change and decades of ill-informed planning also play a significant role.(rapid growth/urban sprawl and paving, paving, paving...)
https://hazards.colorado.edu/news/re...le-to-flooding

Answer right here