14
submitted 1 year ago by grte@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] fresh@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

They do this in the US. I’m torn though. Doesn’t this just incentivize building in high risk flood areas?

[-] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago

Most towns are already built on flood plains because historically it was good farmland. Look at the Fraser Valley in BC. Nearly two million people all living on one big flood plain.

Look at the towns around you. Are they built in a wide, flat bottom valley? That's probably a flood plain. Every town I can think of around me is built in the valley bottom first, then only goes up the hills as development grows over time.

[-] fresh@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

That’s a good point. Maybe subsidized insurance should be available for existing developed areas. But should we subsidize new sprawl in flood plains? It’s also a vicious cycle because the more wet land we pave, the worse flooding risk is for everyone.

[-] yannic@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maybe, but certainly does help the unfortunate souls who already live in areas where the provincial governments have purposefully diverted flood waters, who wouldn't otherwise have been flooded.

They're fine taking the bullet to save hundreds or thousands more homes. They're not fine footing the recovery bill.

this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2023
14 points (93.8% liked)

Canada

7210 readers
309 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS