jj2424 jj2424:
It's funny reading this. The conservative MLA complaining about his own party was replaced with Daniel Smith. Alberta tried hard to throw these Liberal bums out but the media propped them up.
Instead of building dykes on the Bow river these Liberals gave Calgary more money to spend on Druh Farells Liberal pedestrian bridges. Calgarians are still screaming about it. The latest Druh Farrell liberal project is half finished and half way in Medicine hat!
K, you’re kind of going off on a bit of diatribe there big guy and our finger trap looking bridge is perfectly fine and is sitting exactly where it was before the storm.
I think a little reality check is in order on this topic. First off, back in the day most major cities where built besides rivers. This was mainly due to transportation needs and the fact the land close to these areas was fairly fertile which in turn attracted farmers to areas surrounding the cities. The fact is most cities started off on flood plains and as is the case in Calgary the majority of the worst hit areas in the city were in these “older” areas. So in in relationship to that this study that took them 6 six years is pretty much irrelevant because it’s not like there just going to tear down parts of the city just because they happen to have been developed 100 years or so ago on a flood plain.
On newer developments such as within the last 10 years or so let’s face reality here. It is river front property, its prime real-estate. Good luck trying to tell developers they can’t build there or trying to convince Calgary’s “urban sprawl” obsessed council that the land shouldn’t be used. Besides, most of these newer areas are far better equipped to handle flooding such as this. Case and point, Chaparral Valley. I thought they were nuts to build down there as the entire area is flood plain / wetland but even with this flood it weathered the flood without any major problems. Yes there were a few newer communities that were hit but overall the newer areas faired pretty well considering the scope of the flooding. I just don’t see any major problems with developing such areas provided that they are not in “extremely” high risk areas and that there are enough regulations and rules in place to ensure that the construction practices are such that they are built to handle severe flooding or “100 year floods” as they’re called.
As far Joe blow MLA here is concerned his study amounted to what? A recommendation to not sell
Crown Land in flood prone areas. So basically it has nothing to do with municipal properties and only deals with rural areas. Even if acted on it probably only would have affected a handful of communities. At the end of the day the guy is nothing more than another idiot who is just over stating the obvious so he can somehow in his own mind look important.
CKA Elite 
![[B-o]](./images/smilies/drinkup.gif "Drink up")
