Alexandria Flooding - Is there a Plan?

[Anonymous]

We are about to move to a house (luckily on a hill) in the City. We are outsiders, but noticed signs about flooding throughout the city, and I saw this picture online. (hopefully picture works). Is there a plan to do anything about this? How long does a flooding like this last? Does it go inside buildings?

I am not sure that this is where this should be posted, but this seems pretty bad. Does it cause mosquito problems?

https://scontent-iad3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/193616721_10159222171233416_1167288334446401140_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=o-7zXgwG-8wAX_18ZsG&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-2.xx&oh=7454ad0e731bb2fe299a85fa430a53fa&oe=60D7D0FD

[Anonymous]

The plan is to vote out the current Mayor who failed to clean drainage culverts for 3 years while he built bike lanes around town.

Result? Empty bike lanes and tons of flooded houses.

[Anonymous]

You happened to post a photo of one of a few spots in the city that has flooded for literally hundreds of years. That building used to be the seaport inn (I believe back to the 1700s). I looked at leasing an office above it and you had to agree that you wouldn’t have access at times when it flooded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The plan is to vote out the current Mayor who failed to clean drainage culverts for 3 years while he built bike lanes around town.

Result? Empty bike lanes and tons of flooded houses.

THIS.

It’s not a mystery. It’s just misplaced priorities. The mayor cares more about virtue signals to the bike lobby than protecting people’s homes and businesses from preventable flooding. That’s all this is.

Blame the mayor and blame the bike lobby.

[Anonymous]

Climate change is the biggest problem here. The severity of storms are causing lots of flooding in areas across town. Unfortunately this is just something we as global citizens have done to ourselves, and now need to deal with. Here it's flooding, elsewhere it's fires, or rising sea waters. Just another sign of our "new normal".

[Anonymous]

The picture linked is at the end of King St (Union) where it meets the waterfront.

That area always floods because everything east of Lee St is actually part of the Potomac, which is why it was formerly known as Water St.

The other areas that have had notable flooding are also former streams and low lying areas. Basic maintenance and even attention has been lacking, compared to the amount of time the city and council spends on everything else, but there’s nothing magical about the flooding and no it’s not climate change (in an of itself). That’s pop culture science. Surprise you build over or in a river, which isn’t static, eventually it comes back.

https://geo.alexandriava.gov/Html5Viewer/Index.html?viewer=sewerviewer

NOAA updates it’s 30 year weather averages every decade, from which FEMA models flood zones, with community input (typically people try to remove themselves from flood zones because it obligates extra and special insurance). This primarily affects Arlandria and maybe the Waterfront.

Even with 2100 predictions, mean sea level rise is projected at “only 6 feet”. That’s bad, but that also isn’t water world. Not that your typical environmentalist can count or cite data.

https://www.alexandriava.gov/FloodMap

https://alexandrialivingmagazine.com/news/fema-is-updating-its-flood-map-after-10-years-%E2%80%93-what-this-me/

Secondary impacts to the statistically probability of 1/100 year flood (1%) being 1/50 (2%) which then dictates storm water capacity.

The current storm water project, mandated by Democrats in Richmond (and Democrats in Alexandria tried to weasel out of), is for storm water quality, not expanded neighborhood capacity.

In other words the quarter billion the city is spending, doubling the storm water fee, doesn’t address increased rainfall.

Overall this is a disconnect in priorities, and too many BS positions, including outreach, instead of actually doing what they should already be doing. Cleaning the storm drains, expanding capacity, by which we’re talking about an 8” pipe.

Not wetlands, not some overgrown stream, not an infill housing site that won’t appreciable add to runoff in the area (and is the city’s responsibility and interest anyway). And certainly not the other stupid priorities of the city, from a bike lane no one uses (and I’m an avid cyclist), to hitting a useless racial equality officer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Not wetlands, not some overgrown stream, not an infill housing site that won’t appreciable add to runoff in the area (and is the city’s responsibility and interest anyway). And certainly not the other stupid priorities of the city, from a bike lane no one uses (and I’m an avid cyclist), to hitting a useless racial equality officer.

People who describe themselves as "avid cyclists" generally do oppose bike infrastructure. It's a weird phenomenon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not wetlands, not some overgrown stream, not an infill housing site that won’t appreciable add to runoff in the area (and is the city’s responsibility and interest anyway). And certainly not the other stupid priorities of the city, from a bike lane no one uses (and I’m an avid cyclist), to hitting a useless racial equality officer.

People who describe themselves as "avid cyclists" generally do oppose bike infrastructure. It's a weird phenomenon.

DP

I ride daily and I’m 100% opposed to bike lanes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not wetlands, not some overgrown stream, not an infill housing site that won’t appreciable add to runoff in the area (and is the city’s responsibility and interest anyway). And certainly not the other stupid priorities of the city, from a bike lane no one uses (and I’m an avid cyclist), to hitting a useless racial equality officer.

People who describe themselves as "avid cyclists" generally do oppose bike infrastructure. It's a weird phenomenon.

DP

I ride daily and I’m 100% opposed to bike lanes.

Well, there you go. You're an "avid cyclist."

In contrast, people who are NOT avid cyclists generally support efforts to make it more convenient and comfortable for all kinds of people to go places by bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not wetlands, not some overgrown stream, not an infill housing site that won’t appreciable add to runoff in the area (and is the city’s responsibility and interest anyway). And certainly not the other stupid priorities of the city, from a bike lane no one uses (and I’m an avid cyclist), to hitting a useless racial equality officer.

People who describe themselves as "avid cyclists" generally do oppose bike infrastructure. It's a weird phenomenon.

DP

I ride daily and I’m 100% opposed to bike lanes.

Well, there you go. You're an "avid cyclist."

In contrast, people who are NOT avid cyclists generally support efforts to make it more convenient and comfortable for all kinds of people to go places by bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is the biggest problem here. The severity of storms are causing lots of flooding in areas across town. Unfortunately this is just something we as global citizens have done to ourselves, and now need to deal with. Here it's flooding, elsewhere it's fires, or rising sea waters. Just another sign of our "new normal".

Except not keeping culverts cleared cannot be blamed on climate change. Ditto high density development when there is no plan to deal with water (we have this problem in parts of Fairfax Co).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Climate change is the biggest problem here. The severity of storms are causing lots of flooding in areas across town. Unfortunately this is just something we as global citizens have done to ourselves, and now need to deal with. Here it's flooding, elsewhere it's fires, or rising sea waters. Just another sign of our "new normal".

Except not keeping culverts cleared cannot be blamed on climate change. Ditto high density development when there is no plan to deal with water (we have this problem in parts of Fairfax Co).

Apparently climate change causes people to litter, and clog storm drains with discarded empty water bottles. Because they were drinking water, because it was hot outside.

Yeah. That’s probably it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not wetlands, not some overgrown stream, not an infill housing site that won’t appreciable add to runoff in the area (and is the city’s responsibility and interest anyway). And certainly not the other stupid priorities of the city, from a bike lane no one uses (and I’m an avid cyclist), to hitting a useless racial equality officer.

People who describe themselves as "avid cyclists" generally do oppose bike infrastructure. It's a weird phenomenon.

DP

I ride daily and I’m 100% opposed to bike lanes.

Well, there you go. You're an "avid cyclist."

In contrast, people who are NOT avid cyclists generally support efforts to make it more convenient and comfortable for all kinds of people to go places by bike.

People have always had the ability to go places by bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not wetlands, not some overgrown stream, not an infill housing site that won’t appreciable add to runoff in the area (and is the city’s responsibility and interest anyway). And certainly not the other stupid priorities of the city, from a bike lane no one uses (and I’m an avid cyclist), to hitting a useless racial equality officer.

People who describe themselves as "avid cyclists" generally do oppose bike infrastructure. It's a weird phenomenon.

DP

I ride daily and I’m 100% opposed to bike lanes.

Well, there you go. You're an "avid cyclist."

In contrast, people who are NOT avid cyclists generally support efforts to make it more convenient and comfortable for all kinds of people to go places by bike.

People have always had the ability to go places by bike.

John Forester, posting from the grave.^^^

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not wetlands, not some overgrown stream, not an infill housing site that won’t appreciable add to runoff in the area (and is the city’s responsibility and interest anyway). And certainly not the other stupid priorities of the city, from a bike lane no one uses (and I’m an avid cyclist), to hitting a useless racial equality officer.

People who describe themselves as "avid cyclists" generally do oppose bike infrastructure. It's a weird phenomenon.

DP

I ride daily and I’m 100% opposed to bike lanes.

Well, there you go. You're an "avid cyclist."

In contrast, people who are NOT avid cyclists generally support efforts to make it more convenient and comfortable for all kinds of people to go places by bike.

There is zero evidence that induced demand for cycling is a real phenomenon. What we have right now are cohort effects. There was a large generational population of people in their 20s who maybe cycled at university and perhaps continued cycling as they moved to cities for their first jobs. Now that this cohort is approaching early middle age (35+) and forming households, interest in cycling will decline. In 10 years the political winds will shift to meet demand of middle aged parents and a lot of these bike lanes will be ripped up to ease congestion.