"Dagnabbit! We need more government! Revrun!"
Posted on 09/04/2017 10:24:01 AM PDT by Lorianne
Days after Hurricane Harvey hit, Quartz published a fiery article under the title, "Houston’s flooding shows what happens when you ignore science and let developers run rampant." This piece and others like it are pushing a false narrative about Houston's planning. At worst, there's a "They had it coming" undercurrent to some of these stories, one which that implies that the death and destruction from Harvey can be laid at the feet of Texans and their supposed lax, "don't tread on me" attitude toward government regulation. Although this conclusion may be ideologically satisfying, it's simplistic and implies some damaging "solutions." Don't learn the wrong lessons from Harvey. Here are five myths about Houston and why they're wrong:
Myth #1: Better land-use planning could have significantly alleviated this flooding.
Fact: 50 inches of rain would have devastated any city. Even this article acknowledges that the loss of wetlands from 1992 to 2010 accounted for about 4 billion gallons of lost capacity to absorb storm water. Harvey had already dropped 15 trillion gallons as of two days ago. The total is certain to be far higher.
Myth #2: Houston has no land-use regulation.
Fact: Houston's level of land-use regulation isn't all that unusual. The city of Houston proper is unique among large US cities in that it has no traditional use-based zoning (ala-Sim City: residential here, commercial there, etc.), but it regulates land use in many other ways, such as minimum-parking requirements. Many neighborhoods have homeowners associations and deed restrictions that limit what can be built. And Houston's suburbs largely do have zoning.
This "no zoning" claim is a red herring. Houston's suburbs are largely indistinguishable from the suburbs of any American city—a car-dependent development pattern dominated by enclave subdivisions, big-box retail plazas, wide arterial roads and massive parking lots. This is about the only thing you can build profitably given the economic incentives provided by an extremely car-centric transportation network; regulation is only a secondary factor. Houston is not unique or unusual in this regard.
SNIP
Living in Houston, this article is DEAD-ON...if people weren’t told there was no zoning, they’d never guess it. The city is as well organized as any other city, with businesses on main drags and residences on side streets.
The “no-zoning caused it” chorus is simply the Left here desperately salivating at the thought of having dictatorial powers over landowners.
Sorry....can’t buy that argument. Building in low-elevation flood plains near oceans is a real bad idea. Those areas need to be kept in their natural environmental state to protect inland areas where more responsible construction can occur.
Some perspective for those that understand snow more than rain. 52 inches of rain = 62 FEET of snow.
Has Houston flooded in lesser rain events?
Does Houston have a flood control element in its General Plan?
Are developers required to pay the cost of extending and expanding the flood control channels which their development will surcharge with water?
Does Houston’s system of flood control channels connect directly to the Gulf of Mexico?
More cover for the Democrat Mayor.
He’s a Harvard lawyer.
I agree. But that is not the argument begin made.
arrggh .... being made
The left’s insatiable appetite for power marches on ...
Huh? Houston has been developing for decades before the guy became mayor, so how can it be cover for a current mayor?
Houston’s problem is that it is a nice place to live.
This draws lots of Democrats.
This puts lots of Democrats in a place where all the water drains to.
It puts a lot of Democrats in a place where hurricanes regularly come ashore.
This causes large numbers of people who want government to run their lives to live in a place that has weather problems.
What could go wrong?
Exactly. Plus the fact that no matter how Houston developed, the level of rain it sustained was not something you can ‘zone’ for.
When was the original article written?
The Mayor of Houston was supposed to be the next Obama for the Democrats.
Obama got away with voting “present” all his life.
This guy was going to take action.
Actions have consequences.
He runs his mouth about global warming and immigration when he should have concentrated on taking care of Houston.
You bet they are defending the next Obama.
it’s a function of too much gov’t subsidies for sprawl
sprawl is massively subsidized
The blatant ‘regulatory failure’ is that areas which have flooded 3 or more times in the last 20 years are not in 100-year flood zones.
That’s the Fed’s fault, though local governments lobby for a small zone.
Texas needs it’s flood area maps redrawn.
Should we ban all construction for land below 50’ above mean sea level? How about residential construction banned, but allow commercial construction? There goes all the lake front and ocean front property in the US.
What would you do with Florida, Maryland or any other city that developed as a maritime city (NYC, Boston, Philadelphia)?
How close to rivers should we be allowed to build?
It is not as easy as many would suggest to ban all new construction, or to not allow rebuilding after a disaster.
And which disasters will be the “banned” disasters?
If Irma hits the coasts of S.C. and N.C. the same may happen if huge amounts of rain deluge the area. The coastal land for at least forty to sixty miles from the shore are no more than five to ten feet above sea level and fairly flat similar to Houston, Galveston, and San Antonio.
When I was looking for a home near Lumberton NC, I asked about basement and was told that the water table there was measured at about 5 feet down.
Sorry can’t buy that argument. Civilizations are always developed first at low lying coastal plains, dating back as far as recorded history goes. The economy of the world still flows by boat, so port cities are essential. Houston just happens to be the #2 port in the country. River centers are also essential to the economy. That is why you have cities on the banks of major rivers like the Mississipi that flood regularyly. Should we remove all river centers?
Appropriate planning is necessary to defend coastal plains from flooding. Houston hs done a tremendous job of reacting to past flooding to design defensive systems. My back door is 50 yards from the banks of a bayou and the house was never really threatened because of recent improvements to that bayou.
For the first 24 inches of rain, there was almost a triumphant feeling that things were working as planned. All of the attention was directed toward the tremendous force of Harvey’s winds. After the winds died, Harvey stalled and the rain kept coming. It is somewhat similar to Katrina where they were celebrating the passing of the storm and then the levees breached.
The liberals would like to make these decisions based on their own hysteria, based on their own subjective criteria.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.