Why do we build homes where they flood so easily?

[Randomguy]

?

All this rain all of a sudden, things are gonna flood, right?  So why are humans so stupid as to build in areas that are guaranteed to flood from time to time, then act all surprised about it?

Yeah, it is gonna rain.  Sometimes it will rain a lot.  When it rains a lot, low-level areas will fill with water. "Hey, here is a crazy idea, why don't we build on land that won't flood when we get a couple of inches of rain?"

Discus.

[jsharr ★]

 

[maddmaxx ★]

Many of the early settlements in this country were built up around good harbors and river ports.  Who knew eh?

[smudge ★]

And here are millions and millions of dollars to rebuild in the same damned spot. 

What the hell?!!

[Parsnip Totin Jack ★]

Case in point: hurricane Sandy flooded many streets and subway lines in New York City. Why did we bail them out? They’re surrounded by water. Why build there?

[Dottleshead]

Land developers don’t care. They see jobs and profit. The rest is government nuisance. To hell with public safety. Wait. Those government troublemakers probably got paid off. So it’s an effed up system. 🤪

[maddmaxx ★]

27 minutes ago, smudge said:

And here are millions and millions of dollars to rebuild in the same damned spot. 

What the hell?!!

And why let people build where the heat kills people...........or landslides crush houses...........or tornados blow the houses away.............or the hurricanes..............or the forest fires...........or week long power outages in winter................

Wait, have I skipped any part of the country yet?

[Bikeguy]

Some people just are better at living with water than others.   And it is a nice place to visit too. 

 

[Ralphie ★]

1 minute ago, maddmaxx said:

And why let people build where the heat kills people...........or landslides crush houses...........or tornados blow the houses away.............or the hurricanes..............or the forest fires...........or week long power outages in winter................

Wait, have I skipped any part of the country yet?

NJ doesn’t do that bad, at least away from the coast. Although isolated tornadoes seem to have become more common, and hurricanes can be damaging. 

[Ralphie ★]

1 minute ago, Bikeguy said:

Some people just are better at living with water than others.   And it is a nice place to visit too. 

 

You would sure think the mold and mildew would be unbearable. 

[BR46]

36 minutes ago, smudge said:

And here are millions and millions of dollars to rebuild in the same damned spot. 

 

4 minutes ago, Ralphie said:

You would sure think the mold and mildew would be unbearable. 

So your asking....why do people live in Florida. 

[Kirby ★]

Because if everyone moved to the middle of the country, the weight would  cause the country to fold up in the middle like a giant taco and it would be hard to travel.

[Bikeguy]

Just now, Ralphie said:

You would sure think the mold and mildew would be unbearable. 

We never noticed any mold or mildew anywhere we visited. 

[BR46]

6 minutes ago, Bikeguy said:

We never noticed any mold or mildew anywhere we visited. 

Have you ever been to Northern Florida in July? 

[Bikeguy]

1 hour ago, BR46 said:

Have you ever been to Northern Florida in July? 

Nope...  it's humid enough in IL in July.   I don't need to travel to a hotter and more humid place in July. 

[Ralphie ★]

1 hour ago, BR46 said:

Have you ever been to Northern Florida in July? 

Nope!  No Turkish prisons or Gladiator fights either.

[MickinMD ★]

It must be because the politicians and zoning officials get paid off by the building contractors.

When Hurricane Agnes wiped out my cousin's house alongside the Susquehanna outside of Wilkes-Barre, PA in 1972, the government bought her house and the other two near her, tore them down, and changed the zoning so no houses could be built there.

So the family bought a big piece of land on the other side of the River high up a hill and eventually built 3 houses for the parents and kids.  One day in the 1980's, I visited them, looked down at where their old house was, and there were 14 houses built on the land where the 3 torn-down houses had been.  They told me, disgusted, that someone got the zoning changed back to residential and that it was ok'd because the dyke along the river had been raised.

Of course, it wasn't raised a little bit upstream so it didn't stop them from getting flooded some years later!

[ChrisL]

Well if you are talking about out west, we are experiencing pretty rare storms.  It’s not like we get storms like this annually or even every decade and it’s well more than a few inches.  

Levies were completely overwhelmed and burn areas experienced mud slides. Speaking of the fire/mudslide cycle… Yeah it happens every year but it’s a very small % of the total foothill area.  People live their whole lives in foothill areas and never are impacted by fire & mudslides but since it’s in the news every year those who don’t live here think it’s a wide scale issue when only a handful of homes are impacted.

[Thaddeus Kosciuszko]

2 hours ago, maddmaxx said:

Wait, have I skipped any part of the country yet?

I think you pretty much covered it, although I'd suggest throwing a volcano or two in there, on the odd chance people would be stupid enough to build around an active volcano. 

[shootingstar]

To answer RG's original posted topic:

Nowadays alot of municipalities either have the backbone to prevent developers from building on flood prone land OR they just want the land developed and hope there won't be a big flood for another 100 years. Which is wrong thinking.

I live in a flood plain. I admit I didn't do that type of research in advance.

It's been an ongoing issue in our city because the Bow-Elbow river is a major river which runs from Rocky Mountains right through the centre of the whole length for the city.  

[Razors Edge ★]

14 hours ago, Randomguy said:

Why do we build homes where they flood so easily?

My assumption would be because poor people can afford it (until they can't).  And rich people can afford to and are insured against it.

Seems pretty straight forward.

[Randomguy]

15 hours ago, Parsnip Totin Jack said:

Case in point: hurricane Sandy flooded many streets and subway lines in New York City. Why did we bail them out? They’re surrounded by water. Why build there?

Exactly!  The whole east coast is a cesspool anyway.

[Razors Edge ★]

4 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

Exactly!  The whole east coast is a cesspool anyway.

...and these places????  WTF would anyone want to live on the ocean??? That's a raging beast waiting to feed!   

[Randomguy]

1 hour ago, Razors Edge said:

My assumption would be because poor people can afford it (until they can't).  And rich people can afford to and are insured against it.

Seems pretty straight forward.

A friend from the Philippines grew up in a house with stilts, everybody did.  They were considered well-off there, so the stilts weren't a poor person thing.  Acknowledging the weather would be a start, and not insuring stupid house placement is a good idea, too.

Why not just build up if you are in a flood zone?  Stilts work, apparently, or maybe add another level if you plan to live in the stink?

Also, why can't you waterproof a house?

[maddmaxx ★]

Are there really any safe places to build a house?

[Razors Edge ★]

8 minutes ago, Randomguy said:

Why not just build up if you are in a flood zone?  Stilts work, apparently, or maybe add another level if you plan to live in the stink?

I always liked stilts because they give you a covered garage in every home.

But, if you own a second home - a vacation home at the beach - and use it sporadically through the year, what incentive is there to put it on stilts?  If insurance will cover any repairs from minor flooding, and it will be rebuilt - with or without stilts - when there is a major food/catastrophe, I see no incentive to change things.  Sure, some folks don't like the hassle of dealing with insurance companies, but some folks don't mind and also like the idea of fresh new stuff every few years

[Wilbur ★]

16 hours ago, smudge said:

And here are millions and millions of dollars to rebuild in the same damned spot. 

What the hell?!!

FEMA has some pretty restrictive rules now in places that are prone to natural disasters.

[12string]

2 hours ago, maddmaxx said:

Are there really any safe places to build a house?

absolutely, lots of them

Really, any house anywhere could get hit by a meteor or a Melmacian spaceship, so should we just not build houses?

There's levels.  Building houses a foot above sea level on a beach. that sees at least one hurricane a year?  Bad idea.  Build a house inland where you get storms that might cause some damage that you can repair?  Good idea.

 

[Razors Edge ★]

18 minutes ago, 12string said:

There's levels.  Building houses a foot above sea level on a beach. that sees at least one hurricane a year?  Bad idea.

Honestly, it's a GREAT idea the other 364 days of the year.  What percentage of homes in that situation are destroyed? Under 1%?  So, sure, the rugs might get ruined (use tile), and the roof might need replacing, but most folks down there in FL on the coast seem absolutely fine most of the time.  Even the beach front ones.

A wealthier person can offload most/all of the risk with a mild fraction of their disposable income and not even be inconvenienced other than letting someone on staff talk to the insurance folks.  Heck, then they can scoop up any distressed properties that come available.

[12string]

34 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

Honestly, it's a GREAT idea the other 364 days of the year.  What percentage of homes in that situation are destroyed? Under 1%?  So, sure, the rugs might get ruined (use tile), and the roof might need replacing, but most folks down there in FL on the coast seem absolutely fine most of the time.  Even the beach front ones.

A wealthier person can offload most/all of the risk with a mild fraction of their disposable income and not even be inconvenienced other than letting someone on staff talk to the insurance folks.  Heck, then they can scoop up any distressed properties that come available.

Rugs and roofs cost $40B?  Who knew?

A friend is losing her house to this, Insurance won't cover enough.  Someone will "scoop it up" while she struggles to find a place to live.  Out of a hurricane zone this time

[smudge ★]

20 hours ago, maddmaxx said:

And why let people build where the heat kills people...........or landslides crush houses...........or tornados blow the houses away.............or the hurricanes..............or the forest fires...........or week long power outages in winter................

Wait, have I skipped any part of the country yet?

The forest fires can be held to a dull roar with some timber management and controlled burns. A week long power outage isn't a big deal with a generator. 

[Razors Edge ★]

2 hours ago, 12string said:

Rugs and roofs cost $40B?  Who knew?

A friend is losing her house to this, Insurance won't cover enough.  Someone will "scoop it up" while she struggles to find a place to live.  Out of a hurricane zone this time

I get it. But someone will scoop that property up and build there (or add to their existing property).  They might be able to get insurance, self-insure, o arer willing to take the risk it won't happen again.  Not great for your friend, but still the same thing that has gone one forever.

[12string]

19 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

the same thing that has gone one forever.

that should probably stop.

Things are changing, there are places we probably should start migrating out of.  Or at least stop migrating into

[Thaddeus Kosciuszko]

7 hours ago, Razors Edge said:

A wealthier person can offload most/all of the risk with a mild fraction of their disposable income and not even be inconvenienced other than letting someone on staff talk to the insurance folks.

There's nothing wrong with this.  If a person has worked to earn that money then spending it in that fashion takes nothing away from anybody. 

Another way to look at it is that wealthy person is using their disposable income to hire that staffer, who now has a job because the wealthy person has the money to afford a staffer.