Hesco barrier levee breaks-Downtown Davenport flooded

[Mtowncyclone13]

Normal is a long ways off. We are now at around 50 days of above major flood stage (18 feet), river is supposed to crest today at 22.4', which is a few inches from an all time record. More rain coming and could delay crest with a new record high. Really don't see much relief any time soon.

I hope no one takes this as criticism or lack of caring, but we often see alerts that rivers are above flood stage. Oftentimes the river is still in the bank or levees and it doesn't really affect anything. Why do we say it's in a flood stage if nothing is really impacted by it (in most cases)?

 

[harimad]

I refuse to believe someone lived for more than 400 years (or really like age 40 at that time) and that a virgin had a kid.

Wasn't Noah supposedly like 600+ years old when the Flood happened?

 

[BoxsterCy]

I hope no one takes this as criticism or lack of caring, but we often see alerts that rivers are above flood stage. Oftentimes the river is still in the bank or levees and it doesn't really affect anything. Why do we say it's in a flood stage if nothing is really impacted by it (in most cases)?

That's actually a good question.

Flood stage varies town to town and it is a little confusing. The threshold is usually the river elevation where some action is required, say closing a park or a road or shutting off some storm drains so you don't get backup flooding or something similar. It's not necessarily the river elevation were damages to businesses and houses necessarily occur initially.

For example, in St. Paul no structures other than the Harriet Island Park pavilion were flooded this spring but they did close Warner Road and Water Road (underwater). Downtown had storms drain manholes sandbagged and pumps placed there for sewer backup flooding. On the other bank they may have had to shut off the large storm sewer that flow into the river at the levee and flood walls and turn on their pumping stations. When they are relying on the big storm water pumping stations they also typically bring in a backup generator in case of a power outage. Not sure if it got high enough this spring to put the stop logs in the openings through the flood wall or not. Lots of damage prevention going on even if it just looks like only the park is flooding.

 

[CtownCyclone]

AGAIN, you're saying things i never said...i do understand how statistics work...i never said that it only happens once per 100 years. You're trying to take a small sample size and say that's what i'm saying. No no and explicitly no. I feel like i'm taking crazy pills here. A 1% chance over the long run will give you one out of every hundred...not necessarily this hundred but when you average them all out. If i have to explain what an average is to you, then I don't think I can continue this conversation.

But since you won't agree that the document you even cited states them as 100 year floods or 500 year floods or that the terminology is THE SAME F%$CKING THING...lets move on from that.

Lets call them .2% or 1% floods then. You don't think the fact we've had 7 of these in the last 26 years is concerning? That .2% chance has been happening an awful lot. To hit that .2%...if it doesn't hit that mark again...you'd need 3500 years. So over 1000 years before Jesus was born. You can argue the terminology all you want but these are statistically significantly high.



100 year flood and a 1% chance are the same thing. It's only different if you're misinterpreting the definition. They both occur..on average...once every 100 years.

Are they, though? Have there been studies done that indicates this? Genuinely asking.

 

[TruClone]

I hope no one takes this as criticism or lack of caring, but we often see alerts that rivers are above flood stage. Oftentimes the river is still in the bank or levees and it doesn't really affect anything. Why do we say it's in a flood stage if nothing is really impacted by it (in most cases)?

I can assure you, Davenport is definitely affected.

 

[Boxerdaddy]

Are they, though? Have there been studies done that indicates this? Genuinely asking.

I haven't seen anything for the Mississippi around there so if anyone else has I'd be interested.

I found an article about Canadian flooding but they use different terminology (like aboot where we'd say about...) It states 19 times more likely but without looking at the data, levels could be cherry picked to show the greatest increase. And this is only in the last 100 or so years so nowhere near long enough a history.
https://www.squareoneinsurance.com/is-flooding-becoming-more-frequent-in-canada

I could be wrong but this happening 7 times in such a short span seems like it is a statistically significant rise. As mentioned you'd need to average that out over 3500 years to start flattening out the statistics. Sample size of only 26 years is admittedly small though. And to clarify...this isn't saying what the cause is, just that it is happening considerably more often.

 

[Boxerdaddy]

@CtownCyclone Found this:
https://www.aerisweather.com/blog/2018/07/24/flooding-frequency-increasing/

It's not heavy on the stats but does have a few links if you want to dive deeper.

 

[cyfanatic]

New record...

 

[isufbcurt]

Wasn't Noah supposedly like 600+ years old when the Flood happened?

He may have been the first Night King

 

[BoxsterCy]

Are they, though? Have there been studies done that indicates this? Genuinely asking.

The 100 year return or recurrence frequency doesn't mean it's only going to happen once in 100 years or that it's a 1% chance collectively over 100 years. The return/recurrence water levels is what the 1% is based on but it's terminology more common and familiar to those dealing with singular rainstorm events, at least before those regulating floodplains tried to do a better job of explaining it. The storm recurrence is just one of the hydrologic variables that go into overall hydraulic (the physics part) modeling that comes up with the flood elevations used for floodplain mapping of designated zone like the Zone A (1%).

USGS has a nice summary of it all in the this linked pdf:
https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/106/pdf/100-year-flood-handout-042610.pdf

"In the 1960’s, the United States government decided to use the 1-percent annual exceedance probability (AEP) flood as the basis for the National Flood Insurance Program. The 1-percent AEP flood was thought to be a fair balance between protecting the
public and overly stringent regulation. Because the 1-percent AEP flood has a 1 in 100 chance of being equaled or exceeded in any 1 year, and it has an average recurrence interval of 100 years, it often is referred to as the “100-year flood”. "

"The 1-percent AEP flood has a 1-percent chance of occurring in any given year; however, during the span of a 30-year mortgage, a home in the 1-percent AEP (100-year) floodplain has a 26-percent chance of being flooded at least once during those 30 years! The value of 26 percent is based on probability theory that accounts for each of the 30 years having a 1-percent chance of flooding."

If you want to be optimistic you can always go with "Hey, there's a 74% chance over 30-years I won't be flooded!" Your mortgage company might disagree in you are in Zone A though.

And just to make it more confusing every damn high water event and flood is call a "100-year flood" by locals. The term just can't die! Most are not to that level. You can have a major flood, especially for low lying river towns, that causes damage and inconvenience and they are well below the 1% regulatory elevation established for the community.

 

[Deleted member 8507]

On one of the news cast last night they stated why Davenport doesn't build a wall. They have 9 miles of open riverfront. The estimate is $174 million to floodwall it. It costs THE CITY approx. $230,000 for each flood. That is 750 year payback. Now all of the businesses and residents that have huge losses during these floods may disagree with the city, but the city can just thumb their nose and say "we don't want to spoil the view and harm our tourism".

 

[jdoggivjc]

On one of the news cast last night they stated why Davenport doesn't build a wall. They have 9 miles of open riverfront. The estimate is $174 million to floodwall it. It costs THE CITY approx. $230,000 for each flood. That is 750 year payback. Now all of the businesses and residents that have huge losses during these floods may disagree with the city, but the city can just thumb their nose and say "we don't want to spoil the view and harm our tourism".

It’s that attitude that is part of the reason why downtown Davenport is for all intents and purposes a ghost town. Sure, there are some businesses down there as well as restaurants and Modern Woodmen Park, but what entertainment there is to be found in the Quad Cities is generally found in downtown Rock Island and Moline.

 

[TruClone]

It’s that attitude that is part of the reason why downtown Davenport is for all intents and purposes a ghost town. Sure, there are some businesses down there as well as restaurants and Modern Woodmen Park, but what entertainment there is to be found in the Quad Cities is generally found in downtown Rock Island and Moline.

Huge strides have been made since you left the Quad Cities. Lots of new restaurants and entertainment in downtown.

 

[Boxerdaddy]

The 100 year return or recurrence frequency doesn't mean it's only going to happen once in 100 years or that it's a 1% chance collectively over 100 years. The return/recurrence water levels is what the 1% is based on but it's terminology more common and familiar to those dealing with singular rainstorm events, at least before those regulating floodplains tried to do a better job of explaining it. The storm recurrence is just one of the hydrologic variables that go into overall hydraulic (the physics part) modeling that comes up with the flood elevations used for floodplain mapping of designated zone like the Zone A (1%).

USGS has a nice summary of it all in the this linked pdf:
https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/106/pdf/100-year-flood-handout-042610.pdf

"In the 1960’s, the United States government decided to use the 1-percent annual exceedance probability (AEP) flood as the basis for the National Flood Insurance Program. The 1-percent AEP flood was thought to be a fair balance between protecting the
public and overly stringent regulation. Because the 1-percent AEP flood has a 1 in 100 chance of being equaled or exceeded in any 1 year, and it has an average recurrence interval of 100 years, it often is referred to as the “100-year flood”. "

"The 1-percent AEP flood has a 1-percent chance of occurring in any given year; however, during the span of a 30-year mortgage, a home in the 1-percent AEP (100-year) floodplain has a 26-percent chance of being flooded at least once during those 30 years! The value of 26 percent is based on probability theory that accounts for each of the 30 years having a 1-percent chance of flooding."

If you want to be optimistic you can always go with "Hey, there's a 74% chance over 30-years I won't be flooded!" Your mortgage company might disagree in you are in Zone A though.

And just to make it more confusing every damn high water event and flood is call a "100-year flood" by locals. The term just can't die! Most are not to that level. You can have a major flood, especially for low lying river towns, that causes damage and inconvenience and they are well below the 1% regulatory elevation established for the community.

I literally have no idea what you're fighting about. They mean the same thing. You quoted it right there!!!!

"In the 1960’s, the United States government decided to use the 1-percent annual exceedance probability (AEP) flood as the basis for the National Flood Insurance Program. The 1-percent AEP flood was thought to be a fair balance between protecting the
public and overly stringent regulation. Because the 1-percent AEP flood has a 1 in 100 chance of being equaled or exceeded in any 1 year, and it has an average recurrence interval of 100 years, it often is referred to as the “100-year flood”. "

Is this what you're saying it explicitly ISN'T? When your source and the USGS explicitly says that it is? Notice how it says AND. As in they are the same friggin thing.

Serious question, do you know what an average is? No one is saying it can only happen once in a hundred years. But over time...that's what it should average out to.

The chance of occurrence during your mortgage is not the same thing. The 1% or 100 year are for a given year. Not 30 in a row.

 

[CtownCyclone]

I literally have no idea what you're fighting about. They mean the same thing. You quoted it right there!!!!

"In the 1960’s, the United States government decided to use the 1-percent annual exceedance probability (AEP) flood as the basis for the National Flood Insurance Program. The 1-percent AEP flood was thought to be a fair balance between protecting the
public and overly stringent regulation. Because the 1-percent AEP flood has a 1 in 100 chance of being equaled or exceeded in any 1 year, and it has an average recurrence interval of 100 years, it often is referred to as the “100-year flood”. "

Is this what you're saying it explicitly ISN'T? When your source and the USGS explicitly says that it is? Notice how it says AND. As in they are the same friggin thing.

Serious question, do you know what an average is? No one is saying it can only happen once in a hundred years. But over time...that's what it should average out to.

The chance of occurrence during your mortgage is not the same thing. The 1% or 100 year are for a given year. Not 30 in a row.

https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/...ce_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects

 

[Deleted member 8507]

The infamous building that is the barometer of flood levels

 

[cowgirl836]

On one of the news cast last night they stated why Davenport doesn't build a wall. They have 9 miles of open riverfront. The estimate is $174 million to floodwall it. It costs THE CITY approx. $230,000 for each flood. That is 750 year payback. Now all of the businesses and residents that have huge losses during these floods may disagree with the city, but the city can just thumb their nose and say "we don't want to spoil the view and harm our tourism".

$174 million, eh? Seems like a bargain deal on walls these days.........

 

[Boxerdaddy]

https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/...ce_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects

From your link...
This question points out the importance of proper terminology. The term "100-year flood" is used in an attempt to simplify the definition of a flood that statistically has a 1-percent chance of occurring in any given year. Likewise, the term "100-year storm" is used to define a rainfall event that statistically has this same 1-percent chance of occurring. In other words, over the course of 1 million years, these events would be expected to occur 10,000 times. But, just because it rained 10 inches in one day last year doesn't mean it can't rain 10 inches in one day again this year.

Are you hung up on people's incorrect meaning of the term "100 year flood"? I've said repeatedly, if you think these terms are different, you're misinterpreting what the 100 year flood is.

I seriously feel like you guys are just trolling at this point. Every link you've attached says the exact same thing that I'm saying, except for some reason you still believe that these are different terms or mean different things.

 

[CtownCyclone]

$174 million, eh? Seems like a bargain deal on walls these days.........

Cost depends on the beauty level of the wall, I believe.

 

[mdk2isu]

My theory on why the bible talks about people living for hundreds of years millennia ago has to do with terminology. I believe that there was confusion about terms whether they are misinterpreted or the definition changed over time. People have historically logged time both by counting years and counting moons. I believe that at some point there was confusion and people thought historical records were talking about years rather than moons for ages, etc. If you divide 500 some years for Noah or even the 970 some years of Methuselah by 13 moon cycles in a year, you get more reasonable ages even for the time - Noah ~40 and Methuselah ~75.

My viewpoint on the matter is that it doesn't really matter. Debating that topic, or any of the other topics the naysayers in this thread have brought up, is getting distracted by details and missing the bigger picture and message.

There are dozens of time tested principles that can be taken from the test that will improve the life of anyone who adheres to them. Things like loving yourself and loving others. Treating people/elders/parents with respect. Principles on leadership, on prosperity, on forgiveness, on sacrifice. But really, the main message is love. Love for yourself, others, and the world you live in.

People who just dismiss it as a "fictional story" miss out on the incredible wisdom it contains. Which is too bad for them and those close to them. .