The Ultimate Irony, Galveston fared better than Houston (Texas City, Huntsville: how much, homes)

[cBach]

So, after the 1900 hurricane, they moved the main businesses of Galveston to Houston because it was further inland.

The people that stayed in Galveston, however, raised the city level 17-20 feet and sloped the land so that it drains well.

Galveston always has and will be prone to more storm surge, but Galveston is better coped for large amounts of rain.

Houston was built inland and people assumed the risk was low, but they didn't manage the drainage properly. In the meantime Galveston continually improved various flood control measures.

The ultimate irony is that in August 2017 Galveston was pretty much unaffected by Hurricane Harvey but Houston was devastated.

Imagine... had Galveston been rebuilt in the spot it is. It would be like Manhattan now with 1.5 to 2 million people. Texas City and Clear Lake area would have another 2 million. Houston would probably only be a city of 250,000. Hurricane Harvey wouldn't have caused much damage. The skyscrapers in Galveston would have been built hurricane proof and "Manhattan of the South" would have fared okay.

If only we could go back in time... Galveston should've been redeveloped with emphasis instead of shifting to Houston...

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally Posted by cBach

So, after the 1900 hurricane, they moved the main businesses of Galveston to Houston because it was further inland.

The people that stayed in Galveston, however, raised the city level 17-20 feet and sloped the land so that it drains well.

Galveston always has and will be prone to more storm surge, but Galveston is better coped for large amounts of rain.

Houston was built inland and people assumed the risk was low, but they didn't manage the drainage properly. In the meantime Galveston continually improved various flood control measures.

The ultimate irony is that in August 2017 Galveston was pretty much unaffected by Hurricane Harvey but Houston was devastated.

Imagine... had Galveston been rebuilt in the spot it is. It would be like Manhattan now with 1.5 to 2 million people. Texas City and Clear Lake area would have another 2 million. Houston would probably only be a city of 250,000. Hurricane Harvey wouldn't have caused much damage. The skyscrapers in Galveston would have been built hurricane proof and "Manhattan of the South" would have fared okay.

If only we could go back in time... Galveston should've been redeveloped with emphasis instead of shifting to Houston...

But this Manhattan-Galveston you described would have been devastated by Hurricane Ike. So it's pretty much a wash.

With that being said, I have long thought about what the region would look like if the 1900 hurricane had never happened and Galveston was the epicenter of the region. I've always seen it as a Manhattan-like Galveston with dense suburbs all the way north to near where south Houston is now. Houston propoer would be a far-flung northern suburb.

Interesting thought exercise, but I don't think this storm is proof that they made the wrong decision. Houston is still less prone to hurricane damage than Galveston overall.

[astrohip]

There's no irony. Hurricanes destroy coastal towns. Galveston has been walloped to a much greater degree than Houston by hurricanes over the years.

But rains & floods are indiscriminate. They flood where they want.

[DRob4JC]

Let's put the infrastructure of millions of people in Galveston and Texas City and see what happens...

By the way - how much rain did Galveston get?

UPDATE:

Still searching for the final totals...

As of Sunday - Houston - 24.83... Galveston - 10.41... that may have something to do with it, ya think?

-----------------------------

Here's the unofficial 4 day totals..



Galveston did great.

[cBach]

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

Let's put the infrastructure of millions of people in Galveston and Texas City and see what happens...

By the way - how much rain did Galveston get?

UPDATE:

Still searching for the final totals...

As of Sunday - Houston - 24.83... Galveston - 10.41... that may have something to do with it, ya think?

-----------------------------

Here's the unofficial 4 day totals..



Galveston did great.

14" ain't no laughing matter. Houston had more portions of it flood with 14" than Galveston did.

Galveston does okay except with a direct hit.

[Dopo]

Irony?
Huntsville had more rain than Galveston

I wish people had to pass a test to be allowed to write on the internet

[Thoreau424]

There's no irony. Every storm is different. This is basic, Nature 101. Why should a city on the coast always fare worse that a city more inland, in all cases, no matter what? That's dumb.

[DabOnEm]

Originally Posted by cBach

So, after the 1900 hurricane, they moved the main businesses of Galveston to Houston because it was further inland.

The people that stayed in Galveston, however, raised the city level 17-20 feet and sloped the land so that it drains well.

Galveston always has and will be prone to more storm surge, but Galveston is better coped for large amounts of rain.

Houston was built inland and people assumed the risk was low, but they didn't manage the drainage properly. In the meantime Galveston continually improved various flood control measures.

The ultimate irony is that in August 2017 Galveston was pretty much unaffected by Hurricane Harvey but Houston was devastated.

Imagine... had Galveston been rebuilt in the spot it is. It would be like Manhattan now with 1.5 to 2 million people. Texas City and Clear Lake area would have another 2 million. Houston would probably only be a city of 250,000. Hurricane Harvey wouldn't have caused much damage. The skyscrapers in Galveston would have been built hurricane proof and "Manhattan of the South" would have fared okay.

If only we could go back in time... Galveston should've been redeveloped with emphasis instead of shifting to Houston...

You do know that before the 1900 Hurricane, Houston was already larger than Galveston, right (in the year 1900)? And this doesn't include the smaller cities around Houston at the time...some were later annexed into it like the City of Harrisburg. It's a nice tale people in Texas learn about the old Galveston before the storm, but the truth is, that wasn't even the peak for the city. Galveston had larger populations in the 1950s and 1960s. Houston was already destined to be the larger city in Southeast Texas before the storm happened.

[DRob4JC]

Originally Posted by cBach

14" ain't no laughing matter. Houston had more portions of it flood with 14" than Galveston did.

Galveston does okay except with a direct hit.

Some areas of Houston got over 3 times as much rain as Galveston.

Galveston's 14" is over a 4 day period. Houston can handle 3.5" per day.

Bush Airport got over 16" on Sunday alone.

If Galveston got over 40" of rain in 4 days, it would be the Gulf of Mexico

[Sollaces]

Galveston homes are built stronger. More codes and inspections. So they'll withstand more 'damage'.


Now on 8/29/2017 (Yesterday) Harvey was pounding Galveston. I didn't write down stats but they were having storm force winds, rain, and a 1-2' storm surge. Yes that was yesterday.