Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc
Someone's home is not a spelling error. You seem to be a little cavalier with seizing people's homes against their will for a little social engineering.
The damaged homes the county bought out were in flood zones and most already had a long history of flooding; they were at risk even during a hard rain storm where as most homes damaged during Harvey had never been flooded before. You just don't knock down houses that flooded once for the first time. There were ~200,000 houses that flooded...and many of them were $300k and above.
|
You and I simply have completely different perspectives.
Toronto had a 'Harvey'.........it was called 'Hazel'.....only a Tropical Storm by the time it made its way to Toronto in 1954........but dumped enough rain to kill double-digits and wiped out dozens of homes in river valley areas.
The response was to ban new housing in river valleys AND to tear down most that had already been built. Conservation Authorities were created to ensure this level of catastrophe never repeated itself.
For the most part, this plan was executed properly, one or two influential areas got to keep most of their homes, and instead got dams, dykes/berms or other protections.
But today Toronto is remarkably green for a big city, because it has thousands of acres of valley parkland, natural and manicured, where no homes or businesses are allowed.
It was simple, matter-of-fact response to one disaster........never-again.
The same way Australia banned handguns after a violent massacre (a disaster of a different kind)
Much of the world believes in solutions. The persistent objection in the U.S. that we must accommodate people who are wrong is bizarre. No! Change is needed.
Homes within the 25-year flood line must go.
Once you do that, prioritizing those homes that also represent a significant operational cost to maintain due to inefficient land use............
You then move on to penalizing homeowners and businesses who cost the government more money.
Take up more land, pay more tax; use more water, pay more, more power, pay more, have more garages (presumably due to greater use of roads), pay more.
Implement that, and inefficiently laid out homes become worth less and the government will buy them out at a discount, on a willing-buyer, willing-seller basis.