Why were all the RV's left in the flood?

[TNGW1500SE]

I understand that sometimes you can't move an RV when the water is coming up but it looks like there's a lot of RV's that were just left to flood. I mine were there I'd have moved it up the road and out of the coming flood. Maybe some people didn't have gas money??? It would be cheaper on the insurance company to give the people 300 bucks for gas to move it. When there's this much warning, it seems like a bunch of them could have been moved.

[jplante4]

I guess it's time. Can't wait for the Irma thread to start.

CLOSED

[valhalla360]

There is a certain amount of "existing" situations that have to be dealt with but the idea that they are "too poor to not live in a flood zone but let's rebuild in the flood zone" reminds me of the old joke about doing it twice rather than doing it right.

Building in flood zones should be strongly discouraged and removed when ever possible. This is typically a problem where state and federal govt enable local govt to do the wrong thing. New Orleans govt wanted those neighborhoods rebuilt because that translated into money. Open lots and farm land don't generate much property tax and if people move to other cities, they don't qualify for grants focused on large cities, smaller cities don't have as much political clout, so the city fights to rebuild and the state and federal govt who should be looking big picture gives in because they don't want to appear cold hearted.

[azrving]

Relax, it will all be cleaned up and then it will happen again. Maybe it will happen again in Fl and the east coast.....

[toedtoes]

2112 wrote:

rjxj wrote:

2112 wrote:

toedtoes wrote:
Many of these areas are populated by lower income folks. They don't have the option of buying ,or living for that matter, in "better areas" because they can't afford anything else. Thinking it's as simple as "don't build there" is an argument made by those with money and a support system. When you are poor and have no one else to help you out, you find things aren't quite so simplistic and easy to resolve.

You obviously have no idea what just went down. You're saying the poor people living in River Oaks, Memorial and River Stone couldn't afford living in a better area?

LOL, they dont know what those are

That's my point. They are clueless of what they are saying but it doesn't slow them down.

I found his comment insulting to me, my family, friends and colleagues that just lost their homes.

I was not talking about this event in particular. I was referring to the idea that anyone living in a flood zone should move to a "better area". Many of those flood zone areas are inexpensive and cater to low income folks. They don't have the option of moving to a "better area".

Really, you attack me when others have posted that you deserve what you got because you choose to live there. Nice to know politics are more important than humanity.

[2112]

rjxj wrote:

2112 wrote:

toedtoes wrote:
Many of these areas are populated by lower income folks. They don't have the option of buying ,or living for that matter, in "better areas" because they can't afford anything else. Thinking it's as simple as "don't build there" is an argument made by those with money and a support system. When you are poor and have no one else to help you out, you find things aren't quite so simplistic and easy to resolve.

You obviously have no idea what just went down. You're saying the poor people living in River Oaks, Memorial and River Stone couldn't afford living in a better area?

LOL, they dont know what those are

That's my point. They are clueless of what they are saying but it doesn't slow them down.

I found his comment insulting to me, my family, friends and colleagues that just lost their homes.

[azrving]

2112 wrote:

toedtoes wrote:
Many of these areas are populated by lower income folks. They don't have the option of buying ,or living for that matter, in "better areas" because they can't afford anything else. Thinking it's as simple as "don't build there" is an argument made by those with money and a support system. When you are poor and have no one else to help you out, you find things aren't quite so simplistic and easy to resolve.

You obviously have no idea what just went down. You're saying the poor people living in River Oaks, Memorial and River Stone couldn't afford living in a better area?

LOL, they dont know what those are

[2112]

toedtoes wrote:
Many of these areas are populated by lower income folks. They don't have the option of buying ,or living for that matter, in "better areas" because they can't afford anything else. Thinking it's as simple as "don't build there" is an argument made by those with money and a support system. When you are poor and have no one else to help you out, you find things aren't quite so simplistic and easy to resolve.

You obviously have no idea what just went down. You're saying the poor people living in River Oaks, Memorial and River Stone couldn't afford living in a better area?

[bigred1cav]

Second guessing from a safe position is easy. The folks not moving RV's appear to have been full time residents living in those units. Not mobile and most likely rented. Of course trump and the trumpetes would prefer they be Mexican and now leave texas.

[mike-s]

toedtoes wrote:
They don't have the option of buying ,or living for that matter, in "better areas" because they can't afford anything else.

But, if they can't afford flood insurance, they can't afford to live where they are.

[toedtoes]

Many of these areas are populated by lower income folks. They don't have the option of buying ,or living for that matter, in "better areas" because they can't afford anything else. Thinking it's as simple as "don't build there" is an argument made by those with money and a support system. When you are poor and have no one else to help you out, you find things aren't quite so simplistic and easy to resolve.

[valhalla360]

kzspree320 wrote:

Many seem to not understand the term historical flooding. It means it has NEVER happened in recorded history. If it has never happened, how can you assume people should have been able to see it coming in time to react way ahead to time.

And many seem not to understand that the vast majority of ruined houses and rescued people are in areas that do flood with some regularity. Eliminate those and 80-90% of the problem goes away and resources can be refocused on those who did locate in better areas.

[valhalla360]

toedtoes wrote:


There are a lot of other uses for that land that is protected by levies. Business operations, public parks, etc. Roads that allow people to move through that area. Agricultural use. And so on.

Levies aren't just to protect homeowners. Many people throughout the region benefit from the infrastructure. For example, the levy that protects me also protects government buildings, commercial businesses, road access to our downtown region (the only direct access from the neighborhoods north of the downtown), the light rail system, railroad tracks, and agricultural land.

Everyone in the region benefits from those. Forcing only the immediate homeowners to pay for the levy that provides access to the downtown for people up to 60 miles away is unfair. Those people benefit just as much from that levy as I do. And how about all the businesses that use the railroad to transport their goods - without the levy, it would take much longer to go around that entire area.

Parks, roads, agriculture, those are good uses for the land. Once the water recedes, there is minimal work needed to get them back up and running. Assuming it isn't a primary arterial, all those items can shut down for a few weeks as not many people are taking walks in the park right after a major storm.

Homes, business, govt facitlities, etc... should pay their way if they want to use risky areas.

Not suggesting we should level areas but once a storm does, it should all be on the property owner if they choose to go back to the area.

[azrving]

Let me also add that Conroe is one of the fastest growing areas in the country. 249 freeway is being extended along with a Magnolia bypass. Just like an RV sales person be careful of realtors. The first property I looked at was partially in a flood zone and right next to the 249 extension and without a word about any of it asked us if we wanted to make an offer.

At my sons last house the neighbor across the street sold his house and bought land. My son ran into him in a gas station and asked how the new house was going. He said they were living in an apartment because the land couldn't be built one because of flood zone. Yes, they can sell it and you will sometimes see clues to the underlying issues such as words like "recreation" or "enjoy this land while visiting the area". Due diligence and buyer beware.

[azrving]

While looking at properties around Conroe, Montgomery, Tomball etc I talked to an agent at the Allstate office at 5327 FM1488. He said that without giving a bunch of info they couldn't do a quote so he suggested this...he said that with the history of the area even if it doesn't appear on the flood maps that I was using, consider it all as having the potential to flood. He also suggested that one of my shopping tools should be a strong consideration of building on piers. He is a lifetime resident of Tx and lives near Livingston.

Another realtor near Bedias also said that the whole area and especially east of 45 is considered to be a flood hazard and it may have never flooded but never say never. There are no mysteries here and with the lay of the land I would automatically consider a raised house. So with this happening do you think people will start building houses off the ground? No, they will repair these houses and just keep throwing down slabs for new ones. At least it's above sea level. Party on.