Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
there are some of us that are doing just fine.
I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
just about an hour ago.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
changing.
Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
and friends have dodged the bullet.
A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
Leon
On 9/2/2017 11:42 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>
>>>> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to be
>>>> around for weeks.
>>>
>>> Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhood, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartments are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment finder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit.
>>>
>>> FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they were considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighborhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeting, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
>>>
>>> This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't really have a direction for another several months.
>>>
>>> Robert
>>>
>>
>> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I
>> could be there to restore.
>> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
>> Much better than being away from the house.
>>
>> --
>> Jeff
>
> From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in areas where
> many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spare house".
Not true
>
> If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhoods are in
> areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to built/bought
> on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and poor) don't
> have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage.
Actually the richest neighborhoods are along Buffalo bayou, the one that
is expected to be out of its banks for weeks on end. This was a non
discriminatory flood.
It is true that the vast majority do not have flood insurance, only 1 in
6 have it. I absolutely feel sorry for the poor that do not have flood
insurance, not so much for the rich that do not have flood insurance. I
will always have it regardless of my elevation. I could be 100' feet
higher than my close neighborhoods and if debris blocks storm drains I
might flood before they do. This actually happened about 10 years ago
when a tornado went through our and neighboring neighborhoods followed
by about 3" of hard rain. The lower neighborhoods drained quickly, our
neighborhood flooded and it normally took 10+" to flood.
>
> Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time is probably
> a luxury few can afford.
>
Absolutely
On 9/3/2017 3:32 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>> On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>
>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>> question???
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>> recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>
> If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
> property, why would there be an issue?
>
> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
> your driveway?
>
No, I said nothing like that.
On 9/4/2017 12:57 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>> your driveway?
>
> Not to park it, but to leave it for a length of time, yes. We have a limit on how long they can stay if they have dual axles. We have another ordinance that keep people from hooking up to electric, sewer and water services for more than a few days. No one wants to hear the generators running all night, see oozing sewer pipes, the lights hanging off the sides of the trailers so the occupants can sit outside and drink beer. Citizen complaints can greatly shorten the time allowed to have a living unit on your property.
>
My first reaction is, under the circumstances just suspend the
regulations for three to six months. Upon second thought, after the
allotted time how do you get them moved out? Nothing good would come of
it.
On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 3:32:26 PM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
> >I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I=20
> >recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
I remember temporary exclusions being made from time to time.
=20
> If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
> property, why would there be an issue?
I read the City Codes (you can look them up easily if you are asking as mor=
e than a talking point) and they are very specific regulations on number of=
axles, length of trailers, specifics on equipment, equipment trailers, and=
on a on. So a dual axle RV falls under the City Codes, as does a dual axle=
trailer of any type, including livable trailers.
It is illegal to park any vehicle, trailer, piece of equipment, implement o=
f anything that resembles those examples off an "improved" surface. So you=
can't just haul out trailer and put it in your backyard or alongside the h=
ouse. Any of those things has to be parked on asphalt, concrete, or "other=
wise improved" surfaces. The intent is that they don't want grandparents t=
railer hauled into the front yard (or backyard)of a subdivision and have it=
sink in the yard up to the axles.=20
=20
> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
> your driveway?
Not to park it, but to leave it for a length of time, yes. We have a limit=
on how long they can stay if they have dual axles. We have another ordina=
nce that keep people from hooking up to electric, sewer and water services =
for more than a few days. No one wants to hear the generators running all =
night, see oozing sewer pipes, the lights hanging off the sides of the trai=
lers so the occupants can sit outside and drink beer. Citizen complaints c=
an greatly shorten the time allowed to have a living unit on your property.
To be clear, some RVs are too large to be allowed. IIRC, Houston's length =
ban is 20'. No one wants to see some weekend warrior that is used to drivi=
ng nothing large than his minivan trundling down crowded streets, or trying=
to back into a narrow driveway jackknifing the trailer while he blocks the=
streets figuring out how to back a trailer he uses twice a year. And some =
people guests just don' know when to leave.=20
The biggest problem that we had here before all the mountain of ordinances =
were passed was that people drug trailers into their driveways and used it =
as a permanent bedroom for their elderly relatives, unruly teenagers and ev=
en party houses to watch sporting events. Pretty convenient; you have plac=
e to watch the event, a fridge for the beer, and even weatherproof conditio=
ns to do it in. Some of those trailer stayed in the driveways for YEARS, Y=
EARS, axles rusted solid, non working brakes, and sitting on cinder blocks =
since the tires had long rotted out.
Most likely there will be a great amount of leeway and discretion shown in =
trailer use and placement due to the incredible severity of the housing sho=
rtage. In the hundreds of briefings and updates that have followed in the l=
ast tend days, I did catch one where the FEMA guys responded about the trai=
ler availability and use and he said they were proceeding quickly but caref=
ully, adding that they had "learned a lot since Katrina".
Guess we will see. I don't think anyone knows exactly what is going to hap=
pen on any long term aspects of this situation yet. I have been in touch w=
ith my sister quite a bit and at last the water is out of her house. But t=
hey are still pretty much on their own, hauling out all their furniture and=
belongings by themselves. All the aid is still focused on relocating peop=
le, feeding them, and secondary searches of houses and debris, cleanup, etc=
.
Robert
On 9/4/2017 8:06 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/4/2017 12:57 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>> your driveway?
>>
>> Not to park it, but to leave it for a length of time, yes. We have a
>> limit on how long they can stay if they have dual axles. We have
>> another ordinance that keep people from hooking up to electric, sewer
>> and water services for more than a few days. No one wants to hear the
>> generators running all night, see oozing sewer pipes, the lights
>> hanging off the sides of the trailers so the occupants can sit outside
>> and drink beer. Citizen complaints can greatly shorten the time
>> allowed to have a living unit on your property.
>>
>
> My first reaction is, under the circumstances just suspend the
> regulations for three to six months. Upon second thought, after the
> allotted time how do you get them moved out? Nothing good would come of
> it.
That is how I understood that it worked in the past. Most trailers were
provided by Fema so no one really owned them.
On 03-Sep-17 11:57 PM, [email protected] wrote:
...
[good and pertinent assessment of City code elided solely for brevity
... dpb]
> Guess we will see. I don't think anyone knows exactly what is going
> to happen on any long term aspects of this situation yet. ...
I'm certain you're right; they'll have to make it up as they go...
I figured by now there would be similar ordinances in place as other
municipalities have and that confirms my suspicions.
Hopefully they will be flexible for an interim period while folks are
putting the primary residence back into a livable condition and then
work on cracking down on the violations some time well into the future
when there has been ample time before being too heavy-handed on enforcement.
Will be a good comparative test case to see what FEMA has managed to
absorb from the Katrina fiascoes and are able to pull off. At least
Houston isn't saddled with totally incompetent local mayor that was more
of an obstruction than help...
--
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>
>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>> question???
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>
>I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
property, why would there be an issue?
Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
your driveway?
On 05 Sep 2017 20:24:02 GMT, Puckdropper
<puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>>
>> LOL. I always went to the meetings and one day the HOA VP visited me
>> and indicated that the secretary resigned. He asked if I would be
>> willing to fill that spot, I accepted. FF about a year and the board
>> made me president. I keep getting reelected with no opposition and
>> reassigned to hold the president position.
>
>Leadership is sometimes a position they give you to keep you from causing
>trouble. You weren't causing trouble for them, were you Leon? ;-)
It's also something given to you because you didn't step backwards
fast enough.
You do have a point, though. I think twice before I speak at our
annual meeting. My mouth may earn me something my ass doesn't want to
pay for.
On 9/5/2017 8:54 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On 05 Sep 2017 20:24:02 GMT, Puckdropper
> <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>>
>>> LOL. I always went to the meetings and one day the HOA VP visited me
>>> and indicated that the secretary resigned. He asked if I would be
>>> willing to fill that spot, I accepted. FF about a year and the board
>>> made me president. I keep getting reelected with no opposition and
>>> reassigned to hold the president position.
>>
>> Leadership is sometimes a position they give you to keep you from causing
>> trouble. You weren't causing trouble for them, were you Leon? ;-)
>
> It's also something given to you because you didn't step backwards
> fast enough.
IIRC they don't make you take a management position, they ask you.
Whether you take it or not is strictly up to you.
Having always been in a management position since 21, it was not that
big of a deal for me.
>
> You do have a point, though. I think twice before I speak at our
> annual meeting. My mouth may earn me something my ass doesn't want to
> pay for.
>
So think before you speak. ;~)
On 8/30/2017 1:23 PM, Leon wrote:
>
>
> And this picture, taken this morning, looks great compared to thousands
> of other places in the Houston area.
> This is the top of the Barker Reservoir on the SW end of the
> levee/spillway at Peek Road, for those that are familiar.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36113047373/in/dateposted-public/
>
> This is the shallow end of the reservoir it goes about 5~8 miles east
> and north from here and only gets deeper.
>
Post an update when someone tried to drive across the road.
On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>
>> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to be
>> around for weeks.
>
> Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhood, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartments are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment finder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit.
>
> FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they were considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighborhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeting, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
>
> This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't really have a direction for another several months.
>
> Robert
>
I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I
could be there to restore.
The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
Much better than being away from the house.
--
Jeff
On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 8:48:08 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> just about an hour ago.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>
> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>
> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
> changing.
>
> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>
> Leon
Not sure what to say here guys, but best wishes to all of you. I'm very glad to hear that many of you are still doing OK. The entire country is pulling for you.
Slainte, from Boston.
Good to hear you and yours are safe and unflooded. Hope it stays that
way and rain clears out soon.
My neighbor left early yesterday morning to assist down there. He
works with one of the organizations that provides support in areas
requiring relief. Supposed to be there at least two weeks depending on
need and supplies. I give him credit for jumping to anywhere in the
world help is needed, although for his group, it's more frequently in
the USA as of the last few years.
We're all hoping to see a little less of this drastic stuff for a
while. Been too much these last several years.
Be well!
>Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
>down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
>there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
>I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
>morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
>just about an hour ago.
>
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
>So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
>their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
>building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
>and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>
>I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
>seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
>received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
>mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
>Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
>east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>
>This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
>years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
>changing.
>
>Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
>concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
>and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
>A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
>have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
>evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>
>Leon
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 9:15:34 AM UTC-5, Spalted Walt wrote:
=20
> It's good to hear you and your neighbors remain pretty much
> unscathed! Looking back, do you think a mandatory evacuation should
> have been issued by Houston's mayor before Harvey made landfall?
I grew up in Houston and was there during some of the worst storms they hav=
e had. They have decades of experience in how to handle this type of situa=
tion, from hurricanes, tropical storms, and their attendant wind and flood =
damage.
This has been explained carefully to the people of Texas, addressed by our =
governor and the mayor of Houston. They have had evacuations before, and th=
at added more trauma, deaths, and impossible rescue situations. Houston an=
d the surrounding areas have a lot of low lying areas and constantly flowin=
g waterways.
When they flood, they the people fleeing are in panic. It isn't a controll=
ed classroom evacuation where each child waits their turn to exit. It is f=
ull blown panic with everyone trying to save themselves and their families.=
So an evacuation order would have put literally MILLIONS of people on the =
road (pop. Houston metropolitan are 3 million, Houston proper 2.4) causing =
a complete deadlock of traffic. Millions would be trapped in their vehicle=
s. Now add the people fleeing our coastlines that travel through Houston t=
o get away; some fleeing due to their good sense, and others from mandatory=
orders to evacuate.
Next, add all the rest of the people fleeing all the surrounding cities and=
counties. What they are missing in the national news feed is that the flo=
oding extended 150 miles around Houston. 30 minutes from my house, one of =
the rivers is 10' out of its "flood stage mark. 125 miles from Houston, th=
e Colorado river is some unbelievable number of feet out of its bank, and h=
as not risen to this height in over 100 years. People that have never seen=
flooding are leaving their houses and businesses as they have several feet=
of water in them, adding to more highway jams.
If you notice, since so many rescues were required during the last catastro=
phic flooding, there are very few vehicles on the streets this time. The hi=
ghways are vacant. The advice to Houstonians was to "shelter in place". Th=
is has allowed not only professionals to have access to roadways (now servi=
ng as boatways) without worrying about people trapped in their vehicles in =
miles long traffic jams.
It is REMARKABLE that this strategy has worked so well. The people in Hous=
ton and the surrounding areas have banded together to rescue as many as pos=
sible. I have the local news on now, and they just said from the Houston a=
ffiliate that they are now receiving 1,000 calls an hour for emergency resc=
ues. =20
Just as remarkable, and for those doubting the strategy, think about this:
No one saw this storm turning around three times. It is the worst tropical=
storm/hurricane in history at this point, and it is far from finished. Ye=
t, it has claimed to this point only 3 deaths. It is awful to have any, bu=
t considering the circumstances it is incredible to have single digit loss =
of life.
=20
> I've not heard _anything_ on the news as to metro Houston's tap
> water, is it safe to drink or bottled water only?
My sister lives in the area of Houston that was the hardest hit. She has o=
ne of the highest elevation houses in the higher elevation area of the floo=
ds. They had about 4' of water in their front yard/street, and about 2' in=
their house. Down the street, there are houses with 6-8' of water in them=
. The water us receding, and some areas of Houston are opening up, despite=
the rain.
They have no power, no food, most people have no way to cook or heat anythi=
ng,no fresh water, and there is a "boil" order in effect for any water you =
get that doesn't come from a sealed container. I would like to take them s=
ome supplies, but they have advised that the city wants to keep the highway=
s clear for the traffic that NEEDS to go in and out of the city. I am hopin=
g to be able to make it there by the weekend.=20
Here in San Antonio (they are three hours away, in Texas terms "down the ro=
ad"), they have mounted a fleet of buses and are going to bring about 12,00=
0 refugees to our shelters from Houston to add to the 4,000 we have from th=
e coastal communities. That will take some time and highway, as we are sti=
ll getting refugees from areas that were destroyed by high winds.
The State and Federal workers with the aid stations, hot kitchens, supplies=
, clothing and equipment need the roadways to be as clear as possible so th=
ey can perform their tasks. There are 6,000 State/Federal workers staging =
out of San Antonio now to work the coast/Houston/outlying areas as needed.
And it is still raining...
Robert
On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 14:07:45 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>On 9/2/2017 1:20 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:53:15 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
>>> On 9/2/2017 11:42 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrote:
>>>>> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to be
>>>>>>> around for weeks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhood, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartments are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment finder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they were considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighborhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeting, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't really have a direction for another several months.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I
>>>>> could be there to restore.
>>>>> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
>>>>> Much better than being away from the house.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jeff
>>>>
>>>> From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in areas where
>>>> many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spare house".
>>>
>>>
>>> Not true
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhoods are in
>>>> areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to built/bought
>>>> on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and poor) don't
>>>> have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage.
>>>
>>> Actually the richest neighborhoods are along Buffalo bayou, the one that
>>> is expected to be out of its banks for weeks on end. This was a non
>>> discriminatory flood.
>>>
>>> It is true that the vast majority do not have flood insurance, only 1 in
>>> 6 have it. I absolutely feel sorry for the poor that do not have flood
>>> insurance, not so much for the rich that do not have flood insurance. I
>>> will always have it regardless of my elevation. I could be 100' feet
>>> higher than my close neighborhoods and if debris blocks storm drains I
>>> might flood before they do. This actually happened about 10 years ago
>>> when a tornado went through our and neighboring neighborhoods followed
>>> by about 3" of hard rain. The lower neighborhoods drained quickly, our
>>> neighborhood flooded and it normally took 10+" to flood.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time is probably
>>>> a luxury few can afford.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Absolutely
>>
>> Well, at least I got that last part right. ;-)
>>
>
>;~). It is hard to understand exactly what is going on down here by
>watching the news.
That's not unique to Houston or Harvey. The same can be said for
_any_ current event. The news has nothing to do with reality anymore.
On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:53:15 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
> On 9/2/2017 11:42 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrote:
> >> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >>> On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> >>> =20
> >>>> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water t=
o be
> >>>> around for weeks.
> >>>
> >>> Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhoo=
d, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are=
driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartmen=
ts are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment f=
inder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes=
of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit.
> >>>
> >>> FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they we=
re considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighb=
orhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeti=
ng, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
> >>>
> >>> This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't reall=
y have a direction for another several months.
> >>>
> >>> Robert
> >>>
> >>
> >> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I
> >> could be there to restore.
> >> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
> >> Much better than being away from the house.
> >>
> >> --=20
> >> Jeff
> >=20
> > From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in areas whe=
re
> > many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spare hou=
se".
>=20
>=20
> Not true
>=20
> >=20
> > If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhoods are=
in
> > areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to built/bou=
ght
> > on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and poor) d=
on't
> > have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage.
>=20
> Actually the richest neighborhoods are along Buffalo bayou, the one that=
=20
> is expected to be out of its banks for weeks on end. This was a non=20
> discriminatory flood.
>=20
> It is true that the vast majority do not have flood insurance, only 1 in=
=20
> 6 have it. I absolutely feel sorry for the poor that do not have flood=
=20
> insurance, not so much for the rich that do not have flood insurance. I=
=20
> will always have it regardless of my elevation. I could be 100' feet=20
> higher than my close neighborhoods and if debris blocks storm drains I=20
> might flood before they do. This actually happened about 10 years ago=20
> when a tornado went through our and neighboring neighborhoods followed=20
> by about 3" of hard rain. The lower neighborhoods drained quickly, our=
=20
> neighborhood flooded and it normally took 10+" to flood.
>=20
>=20
> >=20
> > Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time is pro=
bably
> > a luxury few can afford.
> >=20
>=20
> Absolutely
Well, at least I got that last part right. ;-)
On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>>On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>
>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>> question???
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>
>If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>property, why would there be an issue?
A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
get a little tight-lipped about it.
>
>Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>your driveway?
Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wr=
ote:
> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>=20
> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> >> >> ...
> >> >>=20
> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to m=
ove into.
> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electri=
city, all
> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful=
time.
> >> >> ...
> >> >>=20
> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to y=
our=20
> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the=
lot=20
> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense th=
at=20
> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcemen=
t.
> >> >>=20
> >> >
> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4=
K housing
> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
> >>=20
> >> I was.
> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
> >> trailer to his septic tank.
> >
> >...because he could afford to.
> >
> >>=20
> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
> >> head.
> >> >
> >
> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
> >
> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in=
=20
> >the Houston area should just do it.
> >
> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardshi=
p,
> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
> >
> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
> yard while his home was being rebuilt. =20
My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solutio=
n
for all.
> There are thousands of
> not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
> too. =20
Yep.
> BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
> who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
> They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
> learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
What do you mean a mess? Everything seems perfectly normal to me. ;-)
"Part of the problem was that FEMA was projected to spend $239,000 for each=
=20
280-square-foot trailer at one site through March 2009 =E2=80=93 as much as=
a buying=20
a five-bedroom, 2,000-square-foot home in Jackson, Miss., according to GAO.=
"
http://www.whas11.com/ext/news/nation-now/fema-emergency-housing-for-hurric=
ane-harvey-refugees-will-be-frustrating-and-a-long-proces/417/nationnow/3dt=
XJhc1mMI4OaE0ikOiwO
On 10 Sep 2017 02:15:47 GMT, Puckdropper
<puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote in news:asq7rclt5c1mf4brd2gu4j5m5jkfpslfpc@
>4ax.com:
>
>> Actually yes.Complete and driveable. Might not pass any safety
>> inspectiom, but as I said - adequate for emergency use. Even if you
>> scrap it after 3 months it's cheaper than a motel.
>> Also some old Class A units - with big gas guzzling V8 engines and
>> even a few old bus conversions.
>> Something I'd travel accross the continent with? Definitely not - but
>> something to keep you warm and dry, and secure - most definitely. With
>> working appliances even, so you can cook meals and keep the beer cold.
>
>One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay for
>a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you could
>load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot. Instant
>temporary apartment complex, good for a month or so for things to get
>going again.
>
>They're supposed to be small and cramped, you don't want people thinking
>they're going to live there for any length of time. Shoot, weld down the
>beds and everything but the chairs for "transportation reasons" but also
>to keep people from moving stuff out to move stuff in.
If we're being creative how about something like a section of a
Japanese "capsule" hotel built into a container. Not sure how many
people you could fit into ond that way but it's dense and cheap and
more private than a barracks.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >>
>> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>> >> ...
>> >>
>> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>> >>
>> >
>> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>
>> I was.
>> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>> trailer to his septic tank.
>
>...because he could afford to.
>
>>
>> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>> head.
>> >
>
>...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>
>I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>the Houston area should just do it.
>
>There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>
OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
yard while his home was being rebuilt. There are thousands of
not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
too. BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 09:04:17 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 08:46:44 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 08:41:22 -0400, J. Clarke
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 22:19:27 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:11:00 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> I was.
>>>>>>>>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>>>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>>>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>>>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>>>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>>>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>>>> >> head.
>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>>>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>>>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>>>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>>>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>>>>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>>>>>for all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>>>>>>>>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>>>>>>>>regard for the folks here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
>>>>>>>Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Isn't that where the tradesmen park and where supplies for the rebuild
>>>>>>are delivered?
>>>>>
>>>>>That's what the _yard_ is for. And the tradesmen park in the street.
>>>>
>>>>Do you block your driveway when contractors show up? I sure don't.
>>>
>>>So you move your boat and your camping trailer into the street when
>>>workmen show up so they can park where those are normally kept? Most
>>>residential driveways don't have enough space for the entire crew that
>>>builds a house to park.
>>
>>Good Lord, you're dense. Nevermind. Argue with someone else about
>>something.
>
>Hey, you're the one coming up with lame arguments why somebody can't
>live in an RV for a while while their house is being repaired. I'm
>just pointing out that they're lame.
Even a slide-in pickup camper would do the job - and you DO NOT need
to own the truck. Just chain it down well!!.
On 8/28/2017 7:47 PM, Leon wrote:
About 1 mile east of our neighborhood.
This was probably taken yesterday or on Monday. I drove most of this
area this morning on dry streets. This neighborhood was lucky compared
to most of the bad areas.
Drone video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDcNCoJ9MbM&feature=youtu.be
And the Cajun Navy, volunteers from Louisiana, which helped rescue
residents out of this same neighborhood. We listened to these air boats
most of Sunday and Monday. The water did not rise as high as expected
so this neighborhood dodged the bullet.
This was taken probably 2 days before the drone video above.
This video ends approximately 1/2 mile east of our house.
The water in our street came up over our curb but not quite to the
sidewalk that runs parallel to the street. We were exceptionally lucky.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sucaDVbz70
DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
>
> I'm glad to hear that you and yours are OK.
>
> My house is about 120' above a bay connected to one of the Great
> Lakes. From the end of my street I can look almost straight down on
> the roofs of the houses on the water. A bunch of years ago I got a
> letter from the company that held our mortgage informing us that our
> property is in a FEMA designated flood zone and that if I didn't show
> proof of flood insurance, they were going to buy the insurance for me.
>
> I tried to imagine what it would be like if my property ever got
> flooded. You say that you heard air boats a mile away? Less than a
> mile from me the houses would be 100' under water! We're talking a
> flood of biblical proportions.
>
> I called them the next day and found out that they had made a minor
> administrative error. They had sent the letter to every customer that
> had a mortgage with them. They told me to ignore it, but it took them
> 3 months to send a follow-up letter admitting their mistake. That
> makes me wonder how many of their customers believed them and actually
> went out and got flood insurance. I wonder if they reimbursed them.
Ah yes, the good ol' Noah flood zone.
Wonder how many of their customers are still paying for flood insurance
even though it's not needed?
Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!
On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 3:08:05 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
> On 9/2/2017 1:20 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:53:15 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
> >> On 9/2/2017 11:42 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrot=
e:
> >>>> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >>>>> On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> >>>>> =20
> >>>>>> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water=
to be
> >>>>>> around for weeks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborh=
ood, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They a=
re driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartm=
ents are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment=
finder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minut=
es of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the uni=
t.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they =
were considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neig=
hborhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a mee=
ting, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't rea=
lly have a direction for another several months.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Robert
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I
> >>>> could be there to restore.
> >>>> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
> >>>> Much better than being away from the house.
> >>>>
> >>>> --=20
> >>>> Jeff
> >>>
> >>> From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in areas =
where
> >>> many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spare h=
ouse".
> >>
> >>
> >> Not true
> >>
> >>>
> >>> If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhoods a=
re in
> >>> areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to built/b=
ought
> >>> on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and poor)=
don't
> >>> have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage.
> >>
> >> Actually the richest neighborhoods are along Buffalo bayou, the one th=
at
> >> is expected to be out of its banks for weeks on end. This was a non
> >> discriminatory flood.
> >>
> >> It is true that the vast majority do not have flood insurance, only 1 =
in
> >> 6 have it. I absolutely feel sorry for the poor that do not have floo=
d
> >> insurance, not so much for the rich that do not have flood insurance. =
I
> >> will always have it regardless of my elevation. I could be 100' feet
> >> higher than my close neighborhoods and if debris blocks storm drains I
> >> might flood before they do. This actually happened about 10 years ago
> >> when a tornado went through our and neighboring neighborhoods followed
> >> by about 3" of hard rain. The lower neighborhoods drained quickly, ou=
r
> >> neighborhood flooded and it normally took 10+" to flood.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time is p=
robably
> >>> a luxury few can afford.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Absolutely
> >=20
> > Well, at least I got that last part right. ;-)
> >=20
>=20
> ;~). It is hard to understand exactly what is going on down here by=20
> watching the news.
You know, it's not just watching it, but reading about also. If you=20
google something like this...
are poorer sections of Houston more apt to flood
...you'll get articles like the ones at the links below.
It's not just the physical flooding, but the aftermath and the lack of
resources typically available to the poorer areas.=20
In any case, the bottom line is what we all know is true: The vast majority
of those impacted can't just run out, buy an RV and move back onto their
land. For those in the inner city or tiny border towns, that option is not
even close to being *on* the most unrealistic list of options one could com=
e=20
up with.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/houston-harvey-environmental-justice_us=
_59a41c90e4b06d67e3390993
https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/08/a-catastrophe-for-houstons=
-most-vulnerable-people/538155/
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>> >>
>> >> I was.
>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>> >
>> >...because he could afford to.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>> >> head.
>> >> >
>> >
>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>> >
>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>> >
>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>> >
>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>
>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>for all.
>
>> There are thousands of
>> not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
>> too.
>
>Yep.
>
>
>> BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
>> who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
>> They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
>> learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
>
>What do you mean a mess? Everything seems perfectly normal to me. ;-)
>
>"Part of the problem was that FEMA was projected to spend $239,000 for each
>280-square-foot trailer at one site through March 2009 as much as a buying
>a five-bedroom, 2,000-square-foot home in Jackson, Miss., according to GAO."
>
>http://www.whas11.com/ext/news/nation-now/fema-emergency-housing-for-hurricane-harvey-refugees-will-be-frustrating-and-a-long-proces/417/nationnow/3dtXJhc1mMI4OaE0ikOiwO
They overpaid for junk trailers. Some that were left over after the
disaster were so poorly built dealers could not sell them at any
price.
On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>>>
>>>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>>>> question???
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>>>recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>>>
>>>If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>>>property, why would there be an issue?
>>
>>A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
>>might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
>>get a little tight-lipped about it.
>>>
>>>Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>>your driveway?
>>
>>Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
>
>I would not buy any property that was afflicted by an HOA. Of course
>the town here thinks it's an HOA so I really need to look into moving.
It's getting hard to buy without an HOA, anymore. Developers use them
to protect themselves during build-out, then dump the mess on the
homeowners. Ours may have gotten the message that we're not
interested (haven't heard from them since the last annual meeting but
this year's is next Saturday).
On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was.
>>>>> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>
>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>> head.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>
>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>
>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>
>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>
>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>> for all.
>
> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
> to rebuild the house either.
>
> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:21:59 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 17:55:46 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 16:01:58 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>yard while his home was being rebuilt. There are thousands of
>>>not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
>>>too. BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
>>>who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
>>>They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
>>>learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
>>
>>Friend volunteered his skills in Katrina, he and the others were
>>housed in Fema trailers. One leaked as if the caulking was missing and
>>lo and behold it was.
>
>I didn't say anything about FEMA doing everything right after Katrina.
>FEMA is (federal) government. When they do something right, it's time
>to be amazed.
>
>>But the other five trailers they used did not leak.
>
>Let's all hope that FEMA learned something.
It was just a comment about an experience, but I doubt Fema learned
anything.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>> >>
>> >> I was.
>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>> >
>> >...because he could afford to.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>> >> head.
>> >> >
>> >
>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>> >
>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>> >
>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>> >
>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>
>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>for all.
Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
to rebuild the house either.
How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>> There are thousands of
>> not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
>> too.
>
>Yep.
>
>
>> BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
>> who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
>> They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
>> learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
>
>What do you mean a mess? Everything seems perfectly normal to me. ;-)
>
>"Part of the problem was that FEMA was projected to spend $239,000 for each
>280-square-foot trailer at one site through March 2009 as much as a buying
>a five-bedroom, 2,000-square-foot home in Jackson, Miss., according to GAO."
>
>http://www.whas11.com/ext/news/nation-now/fema-emergency-housing-for-hurricane-harvey-refugees-will-be-frustrating-and-a-long-proces/417/nationnow/3dtXJhc1mMI4OaE0ikOiwO
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>> >>
>> >> I was.
>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>> >
>> >...because he could afford to.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>> >> head.
>> >> >
>> >
>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>> >
>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>> >
>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>> >
>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>
>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>for all.
They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
regard for the folks here.
>> There are thousands of
>> not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
>> too.
>
>Yep.
>
>
>> BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
>> who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
>> They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
>> learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
>
>What do you mean a mess? Everything seems perfectly normal to me. ;-)
Good point, though normal = mess when the federal government gets
involved.
>"Part of the problem was that FEMA was projected to spend $239,000 for each
>280-square-foot trailer at one site through March 2009 as much as a buying
>a five-bedroom, 2,000-square-foot home in Jackson, Miss., according to GAO."
>
>http://www.whas11.com/ext/news/nation-now/fema-emergency-housing-for-hurricane-harvey-refugees-will-be-frustrating-and-a-long-proces/417/nationnow/3dtXJhc1mMI4OaE0ikOiwO
It's government. Even bottomless pockets will be picked.
On Sunday, September 10, 2017 at 10:27:31 AM UTC-4, Spalted Walt wrote:
> DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> > On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4, nor...@googlegroup=
s.com wrote:
> > > [email protected] wrote in news:asq7rclt5c1mf4brd2gu4j5m5jkfpslfpc@
> > > 4ax.com:
> > >=20
> > > > Actually yes.Complete and driveable. Might not pass any safety
> > > > inspectiom, but as I said - adequate for emergency use. Even if you
> > > > scrap it after 3 months it's cheaper than a motel.
> > > > Also some old Class A units - with big gas guzzling V8 engines and
> > > > even a few old bus conversions.
> > > > Something I'd travel accross the continent with? Definitely not - b=
ut
> > > > something to keep you warm and dry, and secure - most definitely. W=
ith
> > > > working appliances even, so you can cook meals and keep the beer co=
ld.
> > >=20
> > > One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay =
for=20
> > > a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you coul=
d=20
> > > load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.=20
> >=20
> > Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading =
equipment can
> > be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation step to the set-up=
process.
> >=20
> > > Instant=20
> > > temporary apartment complex, good for a month or so for things to get=
=20
> > > going again.
> >=20
> > A month or so isn't going to be enough. It'll take a lot longer than th=
at to set up=20
> > long term temporary housing.
> >=20
> >=20
> > >=20
> > > They're supposed to be small and cramped, you don't want people think=
ing=20
> > > they're going to live there for any length of time. Shoot, weld down=
the=20
> > > beds and everything but the chairs for "transportation reasons" but a=
lso=20
> > > to keep people from moving stuff out to move stuff in.
> >=20
> > Ventilation could be an issue. You need windows, fans, heaters, etc. He=
ck, FEMA
> > got screwed on trailers that were designed to be lived in. Imagine all =
the issues with
> > housing people in converted shipping containers. The lawyers are alread=
y salivating.
> >=20
> > Besides, the gathering of the containers and beds, the cleaning, the w=
elding,=20
> > the set-up etc. all take the "instant" part out of the equation.=20
>=20
> PODS=C2=AE
>=20
> https://www.pods.com/container-sizes
> http://us.exaude.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/pods-3.jpg
> https://tours.360wichita.com/3868/slideshow10307/delivery.jpg
Nice pictures.
Is there a reason that you posted them?
On Sun, 10 Sep 2017 06:12:47 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote in news:asq7rclt5c1mf4brd2gu4j5m5jkfpslfpc@
>> 4ax.com:
>>
>> > Actually yes.Complete and driveable. Might not pass any safety
>> > inspectiom, but as I said - adequate for emergency use. Even if you
>> > scrap it after 3 months it's cheaper than a motel.
>> > Also some old Class A units - with big gas guzzling V8 engines and
>> > even a few old bus conversions.
>> > Something I'd travel accross the continent with? Definitely not - but
>> > something to keep you warm and dry, and secure - most definitely. With
>> > working appliances even, so you can cook meals and keep the beer cold.
>>
>> One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay for
>> a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you could
>> load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.
>
>Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading equipment can
>be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation step to the set-up process.
It was talked about post-Katrina but never went anywhere. I think it
would be a good idea. The "housing" could be stored for the next
emergency, unless they couldn't keep critters out of them (don't
know). They wouldn't be of much use if they were rodent infested when
they were needed. Cleaning after might be a problem, too.
In an emergency, it should be possible to find some space next to a
rail line.
>
>> Instant
>> temporary apartment complex, good for a month or so for things to get
>> going again.
>
>A month or so isn't going to be enough. It'll take a lot longer than that to set up
>long term temporary housing.
>
>
>>
>> They're supposed to be small and cramped, you don't want people thinking
>> they're going to live there for any length of time. Shoot, weld down the
>> beds and everything but the chairs for "transportation reasons" but also
>> to keep people from moving stuff out to move stuff in.
>
>Ventilation could be an issue. You need windows, fans, heaters, etc. Heck, FEMA
>got screwed on trailers that were designed to be lived in. Imagine all the issues with
>housing people in converted shipping containers. The lawyers are already salivating.
The difference is that there would be time to plan. That said, the
government isn't good at planning.
>
>Besides, the gathering of the containers and beds, the cleaning, the welding,
>the set-up etc. all take the "instant" part out of the equation.
I was thinking more of an advanced project. Make 10K of them and
store them around the country on military bases, or some such.
DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote in news:asq7rclt5c1mf4brd2gu4j5m5jkfpslfpc@
> > 4ax.com:
> >
> > > Actually yes.Complete and driveable. Might not pass any safety
> > > inspectiom, but as I said - adequate for emergency use. Even if you
> > > scrap it after 3 months it's cheaper than a motel.
> > > Also some old Class A units - with big gas guzzling V8 engines and
> > > even a few old bus conversions.
> > > Something I'd travel accross the continent with? Definitely not - but
> > > something to keep you warm and dry, and secure - most definitely. With
> > > working appliances even, so you can cook meals and keep the beer cold.
> >
> > One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay for
> > a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you could
> > load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.
>
> Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading equipment can
> be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation step to the set-up process.
>
> > Instant
> > temporary apartment complex, good for a month or so for things to get
> > going again.
>
> A month or so isn't going to be enough. It'll take a lot longer than that to set up
> long term temporary housing.
>
>
> >
> > They're supposed to be small and cramped, you don't want people thinking
> > they're going to live there for any length of time. Shoot, weld down the
> > beds and everything but the chairs for "transportation reasons" but also
> > to keep people from moving stuff out to move stuff in.
>
> Ventilation could be an issue. You need windows, fans, heaters, etc. Heck, FEMA
> got screwed on trailers that were designed to be lived in. Imagine all the issues with
> housing people in converted shipping containers. The lawyers are already salivating.
>
> Besides, the gathering of the containers and beds, the cleaning, the welding,
> the set-up etc. all take the "instant" part out of the equation.
PODS®
https://www.pods.com/container-sizes
http://us.exaude.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/pods-3.jpg
https://tours.360wichita.com/3868/slideshow10307/delivery.jpg
On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>>>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>>>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>>>>> question???
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>>>> recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>>>>
>>>> If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>>>> property, why would there be an issue?
>>>
>>> A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
>>> might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
>>> get a little tight-lipped about it.
>>>>
>>>> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>>> your driveway?
>>>
>>> Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
>>
>> I would not buy any property that was afflicted by an HOA. Of course
>> the town here thinks it's an HOA so I really need to look into moving.
>
> It's getting hard to buy without an HOA, anymore. Developers use them
> to protect themselves during build-out, then dump the mess on the
> homeowners. Ours may have gotten the message that we're not
> interested (haven't heard from them since the last annual meeting but
> this year's is next Saturday).
>
In the Houston area the HOA takes over where the local governments leave
off. Our HOA pays for landscape crews to keep up with the common areas
and the entrances. The HOA pays for maintenance around the neighborhood
and pays for street lighting, mosquito control, etc.
I actually prefer to be in a strict HOA, you can not buy in a
neighborhood with knowing and agreeing to the rules and regulations.
Our HOA is not terrible to deal with....I'm the president. ;~) But we
do want residents to pay their dues and to not be the eye sore on the
street.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 12:23:24 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> This morning I walked up to and over the reservoir and down the other
> side.
You walked?
> And this picture, taken this morning,
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36113047373/in/dateposted-public/
That your Tundra ruts? Is that why you were walking? Kinna like at the farm, at times, when certain nephews are driving.
Sonny
On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
=20
> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to be=
=20
> around for weeks.
Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhood, but=
"all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are drivi=
ng around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartments are=
lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment finder =
pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes of a =
posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit. =20
FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they were con=
sidered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighborhood=
, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeting, bu=
t she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't really have=
a direction for another several months.=20
Robert
On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 7:48:08 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> just about an hour ago.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>
> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>
> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
> changing.
>
> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>
> Leon
Take care, Leon. Good thoughts your way.
On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 8:48:08 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> just about an hour ago.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
I'm glad to hear that you and yours are OK.
My house is about 120' above a bay connected to one of the Great Lakes.
From the end of my street I can look almost straight down on the roofs of
the houses on the water. A bunch of years ago I got a letter from the company that held our mortgage informing us that our property is in a FEMA designated
flood zone and that if I didn't show proof of flood insurance, they were
going to buy the insurance for me.
I tried to imagine what it would be like if my property ever got flooded.
You say that you heard air boats a mile away? Less than a mile from me the
houses would be 100' under water! We're talking a flood of biblical
proportions.
I called them the next day and found out that they had made a minor
administrative error. They had sent the letter to every customer that had a
mortgage with them. They told me to ignore it, but it took them 3 months to
send a follow-up letter admitting their mistake. That makes me wonder how
many of their customers believed them and actually went out and got flood
insurance. I wonder if they reimbursed them.
On 8/29/2017 9:15 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
>> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
>> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>>
>> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
>> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
>> just about an hour ago.
>>
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>>
>> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
>> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
>> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
>> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>>
>> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
>> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
>> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
>> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
>> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
>> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>>
>> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
>> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
>> changing.
>>
>> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
>> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
>> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>>
>> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
>> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
>> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>>
>> Leon
>
> It's good to hear you and your neighbors remain pretty much
> unscathed! Looking back, do you think a mandatory evacuation should
> have been issued by Houston's mayor before Harvey made landfall?
Absolutely not. In 2005 just weeks after the Katrina disaster that hit
New Orleans Houston was faced with hurricane Rita. Needless to say
images of Katrina were still on all of us Hustonians minds. Evacuations
might be ok if you have a few weeks to do so. A certain Dr. Neil Frank
weather guy on TV indicated that this storm was going to be worst than
Katrina and the Houston was going to be a direct target. Houston would
be "devastated", get out NOW.
IIRC some two million residents began evacuation 3 days before expected
land fall. The highways were so over loaded that most people sat in a
bumper to bumper parking lot that probably stretched 100 miles in some
places. Vehicles ran out of gas on the highway while sitting 24-48
hours waiting to get no where. Many people died in their vehicles as a
result. Unnecessary deaths that today I point the finger at the good
Dr. Yo do not flee winds. If you have time you flee rising water.
We did not have time.
>
> I've not heard _anything_ on the news as to metro Houston's tap
> water, is it safe to drink or bottled water only?
With the exception of a very few cases the water is good. A couple of
days before Harvey hit here our MUD president informed me that they had
a back up generator for drinking water and one for the waste water plant.
>
> Storm chaser, Jeff Piotrowski live-streamed the most incredible video
> from the eye-wall - briefly in Fulton:
> https://www.youtube.com/embed/U4fUdJBlrtQ?autoplay=1
>
> ... then from Rockport during landfall:
> https://www.youtube.com/embed/OH-l83EUsIw?autoplay=1
>
On 8/28/2017 8:47 PM, Leon wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> just about an hour ago.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
Thanks for the update. Hope is stays OK for you.
Our town was severely flooded in the hurricane of 1955, long before I
moved here. One thing that helped me decide when I bought this house is
the street in back of me is 20 feet lower than my house, the river
another 20 feet below that.
On 8/30/2017 3:14 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 8/30/2017 1:23 PM, Leon wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> And this picture, taken this morning, looks great compared to
>> thousands of other places in the Houston area.
>> This is the top of the Barker Reservoir on the SW end of the
>> levee/spillway at Peek Road, for those that are familiar.
>>
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36113047373/in/dateposted-public/
>>
>> This is the shallow end of the reservoir it goes about 5~8 miles east
>> and north from here and only gets deeper.
>>
>
> Post an update when someone tried to drive across the road.
If you watch TV and see the stranded cars, that was the drivers trying
to cross the road. The water came up that quickly. If you are driving
in 6~10 water and you engine stalls, you are toast.
On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 7:48:08 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering=20
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly=20
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
Glad to hear all's well. I have lots of relatives in & about Houston. O=
nly one cousin's daughter's home was flooded. All others are doing okay, =
damage-wise. A few are without power, but are staying with family.
I had kept some tabs with the goings-on, mainly with the Lafayette area. =
Only about 5" of rain, here. Seems Lafayette was between the severe rain =
bands. Not until I got home did I discover I-10 was closed past the state =
line to Houston. I was told most of Beaumont is under water. That's ser=
ious flooding. Driving through town, I noticed more/congested traffic, th=
an normal, lots of Texas plates on vehicles.
Sonny
On Mon, 28 Aug 2017 19:47:56 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
>down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
>there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
>I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
>morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
>just about an hour ago.
>
>https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
>So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
>their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
>building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
>and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>
>I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
>seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
>received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
>mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
>Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
>east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>
>This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
>years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
>changing.
>
>Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
>concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
>and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
>A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
>have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
>evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>
>Leon
>
>
Thanks for the update Leon - glad you are OK. Stay safe.
We have friends in Conroe - who we just talked to - so far so good.
John T. in Canada
On Monday, August 28, 2017 at 7:48:08 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> just about an hour ago.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>
> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>
> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
> changing.
>
> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>
> Leon
Leon, glad to hear you are okay. As you said, so many are not.
Its at times like this we realize just how much we actually need each other.
On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrote:
> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> > On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> > =20
> >> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to =
be
> >> around for weeks.
> >=20
> > Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhood,=
but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are d=
riving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartments=
are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment fin=
der pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes o=
f a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit.
> >=20
> > FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they were=
considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighbor=
hood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeting=
, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
> >=20
> > This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't really =
have a direction for another several months.
> >=20
> > Robert
> >=20
>=20
> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I=20
> could be there to restore.
> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
> Much better than being away from the house.
>=20
> --=20
> Jeff
From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in areas where
many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spare house".
If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhoods are in
areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to built/bought
on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and poor) don't
have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage. =20
Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time is probabl=
y=20
a luxury few can afford.
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>> ...
>>
>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>
>
>I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
I was.
When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
trailer to his septic tank.
Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
head.
>
>> It would be good to think it possible but I really doubt it's feasible
>> -- and, of course, if it were, overnight those $4K trailers will be $10K
>> or $15K...
>>
>> Some of the Houston crowd can update -- at one time 30 yr ago when was
>> still consulting down there some for Shell Development, there was little
>> zoning but code enforcement was fairly far along. I'm guessing they've
>> added more reg's since.
>>
>> --
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:31:35 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On 9/8/17 10:26 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:31:43 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/7/2017 9:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 09:44:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I was.
>>>>>>>>>> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>>> for all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
>>>>>> to rebuild the house either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
>>>>
>>>> If they are renting then why do they need to rebuild the house? It
>>>> isn't _their_ house.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> UHhhh they have to live some where. you idiot. You must be one of the
>>> most miserable persons I have ever been exposed to.
>>
>> Yes, they do. But they are not going to be rebuilding anything, they
>> are going to be looking for another place to rent.
>>
>> That you don't grasp this and find it appropiate to call other people
>> stupid when they don't just agree with you says that you are both
>> immature and insecure.
>>
>> And once again I am bored with your bullshit so back into the killfile
>> you go.
>>
>
>Grow the fu@k up.
>You were being argumentative, judgemental, and very unsympathetic.
>Killfile.... pffft. What grade are you in?
<plonk>
On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 23:28:01 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>SNIP
>>
>>"RV" can also be a trailer. I don't imagine you could buy much of a
>>class-A motor home for $4000.
>Lots of Class C units adequate for emergency purposes for $4000 or
>less.
With the vehicle? Nothing roadworthy, for sure.
[email protected] writes:
>On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>first time around.
>>
>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>
>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>cat-4 hurricanes.
Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
flooded out vehicles.
On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 03:41:56 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 10:24:07 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
>> >...
>> >
>> >> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
>> >> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>> >
>> >And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
>> >as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
>>
>> I think the idea is that these intermodal containers could be shipped
>> where they're needed using existing infrastructure and *stored* until
>> needed. The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>> first time around.
>
>Where would you store them? Considering we now know where they are needed, where
>would you have stored them prior to Harvey and Irma.
There are one or two army bases in Florida, Georgia, and even Texas.
>
>Would enough containers have been delivered to Barbuda prior to Irma? The Keys? The
>coastal areas around Houston - e.g. the small towns and villages, etc.?
Is FEMA responsible for "Barbuda"? Can FEMA build trailers and have
them pre-placed around the Keys, Houston, small towns and villages,
*before* the hurricane hits? Good grief. THINK! Guess what
"intermodal" means.
>Do you load up California in anticipation of the Big One? If so, where? Everywhere?
Hell, no. Store them in Antarctica where they'll be out of sight!
<sheesh>
>How do you determine where the next disaster will strike? How do keep them ready for use
>when they may sit fior decades?
That's why the steel shell makes sense. Drywall and termite barf that
FEMA used makes no sense at all.
It's not decades between emergencies, BTW.
>
>> >There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
>> >shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
>> >repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
>> >they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
>>
>> For permanent homes, no, I don't think anyone is proposing that
>> they're a good idea.
[email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>first time around.
>>
>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>
> Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
> cat-4 hurricanes.
>
Downed trees are good for the local economy. All the bearded
backwoodsmen are swarming around in their pickups with a chainsaw and
a trailer. Let them make a little money off the storm, I say.
--
GW Ross
On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>first time around.
>
>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
cat-4 hurricanes.
On 9/20/2017 9:28 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2017 23:11:14 -0500, Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 23:34:06 -0400, J. Clarke
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>>>>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>>>>
>>>>> Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>>>>
>>>> If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit
>>>> blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it
>>>> means.
>>>>
>>> No need for "zoning" at all. Just stop subsidizing flood insurance.
>>> If you want to build below sea level, have at it.
>>>
>>
>> Much of the flooding in the Houston area was 100' above sea level.
>> Elevation does not guarantee against flooding.
>> Our home is at 98'. Water only came up over our curb. Homes 1 mile north
>> of us are are at 100' and had 18" of water in their homes.
>
>
> a pail on top of a table will hold more water than a saucer on the
> floor -- It's more terrain than altitude.
Exactly! And yet some believe that altitude is the determining factor.
On Tue, 19 Sep 2017 23:11:14 -0500, Leon <[email protected]> wrote:
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 23:34:06 -0400, J. Clarke
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>
>>>>>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>>>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>>>
>>>>> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>>>
>>>> Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>>>
>>> If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit
>>> blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it
>>> means.
>>>
>> No need for "zoning" at all. Just stop subsidizing flood insurance.
>> If you want to build below sea level, have at it.
>>
>
>Much of the flooding in the Houston area was 100' above sea level.
>Elevation does not guarantee against flooding.
>Our home is at 98'. Water only came up over our curb. Homes 1 mile north
>of us are are at 100' and had 18" of water in their homes.
a pail on top of a table will hold more water than a saucer on the
floor -- It's more terrain than altitude.
That said, most of Waterloo amd Kitchener and all of Bridgeport
would be under water before water came over the kurb here - - -
On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 22:19:27 -0400, J. Clarke
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:11:00 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> I was.
>>>>>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>> >> head.
>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>>for all.
>>>>>
>>>>>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>>>>>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>>>>>regard for the folks here.
>>>>
>>>>(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
>>>>Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
>>>
>>>Isn't that where the tradesmen park and where supplies for the rebuild
>>>are delivered?
>>
>>That's what the _yard_ is for. And the tradesmen park in the street.
>
>Do you block your driveway when contractors show up? I sure don't.
So you move your boat and your camping trailer into the street when
workmen show up so they can park where those are normally kept? Most
residential driveways don't have enough space for the entire crew that
builds a house to park.
>>> It probably wouldn't be a good idea to constantly be
>>>in their way. Perhaps you like someone living in the middle of your
>>>workspace, though.
>>
>>If you're in their way then start the damned thing up and drive off.
>>You clearly don't grasp the conept of "RV".
>
>"RV" can also be a trailer. I don't imagine you could buy much of a
>class-A motor home for $4000.
So? Who said anything about "class A". You're looking for an
alternative to a motel room, not an alternative to Versaiiles.
>>>>(2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
>>>>be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
>>>>responsibility to rebuild it).
>>>
>>>Duh! That was my point. Genius!
>>
>>No, your point was something about people who have houses but are too
>>poor to obtain an RV.
>
>No, that certainly was *not* my point. I never said anything of the
>kind.
Then you should learn to write more clearly.
>>For people who don't have houses to begin with, rebuilding is not an
>>issue.
>
>Except that they have nowhere to live.
Which has what to do with rebuilding a house that they do not own?
Renters aren't tied to a particular property. They aren't going to
rebuild the landlord's house for him and they don't have any need to
live near a particular property while someone is building more rentals
or rebuilding existing ones. If they have skills that are in demand
they may just move somewhere else. After Katrina, a lot of people
moved to Texas. Now they may move back to New Orleans.
On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 08:41:22 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 22:19:27 -0400, J. Clarke
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:11:00 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> I was.
>>>>>>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>> >> head.
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>>>for all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>>>>>>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>>>>>>regard for the folks here.
>>>>>
>>>>>(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
>>>>>Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
>>>>
>>>>Isn't that where the tradesmen park and where supplies for the rebuild
>>>>are delivered?
>>>
>>>That's what the _yard_ is for. And the tradesmen park in the street.
>>
>>Do you block your driveway when contractors show up? I sure don't.
>
>So you move your boat and your camping trailer into the street when
>workmen show up so they can park where those are normally kept? Most
>residential driveways don't have enough space for the entire crew that
>builds a house to park.
>
>>>> It probably wouldn't be a good idea to constantly be
>>>>in their way. Perhaps you like someone living in the middle of your
>>>>workspace, though.
>>>
>>>If you're in their way then start the damned thing up and drive off.
>>>You clearly don't grasp the conept of "RV".
>>
>>"RV" can also be a trailer. I don't imagine you could buy much of a
>>class-A motor home for $4000.
>
>So? Who said anything about "class A". You're looking for an
>alternative to a motel room, not an alternative to Versaiiles.
>
>>>>>(2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
>>>>>be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
>>>>>responsibility to rebuild it).
>>>>
>>>>Duh! That was my point. Genius!
>>>
>>>No, your point was something about people who have houses but are too
>>>poor to obtain an RV.
>>
>>No, that certainly was *not* my point. I never said anything of the
>>kind.
>
>Then you should learn to write more clearly.
>
>>>For people who don't have houses to begin with, rebuilding is not an
>>>issue.
>>
>>Except that they have nowhere to live.
>
>Which has what to do with rebuilding a house that they do not own?
>Renters aren't tied to a particular property. They aren't going to
>rebuild the landlord's house for him and they don't have any need to
>live near a particular property while someone is building more rentals
>or rebuilding existing ones. If they have skills that are in demand
>they may just move somewhere else. After Katrina, a lot of people
>moved to Texas. Now they may move back to New Orleans.
Or if they are smart somewhere where Hurricaines are not an everyday
fact of life - and forget Kansas or Oklahoma where Tornadows can be
just as bad. For the "poor" - retired, unemployed or on welfare there
is nothing stopping them from movng to somewhere where housing is
cheap and jobs are scarce. Detroit mabee??
On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 08:41:22 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 22:19:27 -0400, J. Clarke
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:11:00 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> I was.
>>>>>>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>> >> head.
>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>>>for all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>>>>>>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>>>>>>regard for the folks here.
>>>>>
>>>>>(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
>>>>>Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
>>>>
>>>>Isn't that where the tradesmen park and where supplies for the rebuild
>>>>are delivered?
>>>
>>>That's what the _yard_ is for. And the tradesmen park in the street.
>>
>>Do you block your driveway when contractors show up? I sure don't.
>
>So you move your boat and your camping trailer into the street when
>workmen show up so they can park where those are normally kept? Most
>residential driveways don't have enough space for the entire crew that
>builds a house to park.
Good Lord, you're dense. Nevermind. Argue with someone else about
something.
On 9/9/17 7:48 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:31:35 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On 9/8/17 10:26 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:31:43 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/7/2017 9:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 09:44:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I was.
>>>>>>>>>>> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>>>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>>>> for all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
>>>>>>> to rebuild the house either.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
>>>>>
>>>>> If they are renting then why do they need to rebuild the house? It
>>>>> isn't _their_ house.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> UHhhh they have to live some where. you idiot. You must be one of the
>>>> most miserable persons I have ever been exposed to.
>>>
>>> Yes, they do. But they are not going to be rebuilding anything, they
>>> are going to be looking for another place to rent.
>>>
>>> That you don't grasp this and find it appropiate to call other people
>>> stupid when they don't just agree with you says that you are both
>>> immature and insecure.
>>>
>>> And once again I am bored with your bullshit so back into the killfile
>>> you go.
>>>
>>
>> Grow the fu@k up.
>> You were being argumentative, judgemental, and very unsympathetic.
>> Killfile.... pffft. What grade are you in?
>
> <plonk>
>
So 5th grade, ok.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 9/9/2017 9:02 AM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 9/9/17 7:48 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 22:31:35 -0500, -MIKE- <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/8/17 10:26 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:31:43 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/7/2017 9:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 09:44:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4,
>>>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4,
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you to move into.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electricity, all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stressful time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trailering to your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it on the lot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sense that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enforcement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Â Â Â Â I was.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Â Â Â Â When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly
>>>>>>>>>>>> what he did.
>>>>>>>>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the
>>>>>>>>>>>> new house
>>>>>>>>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the
>>>>>>>>>>>> effluent from the
>>>>>>>>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Â Â Â Â Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not
>>>>>>>>>>>> be something
>>>>>>>>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2
>>>>>>>>>>>> million
>>>>>>>>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a
>>>>>>>>>>>> kitchen and
>>>>>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer
>>>>>>>>>>> as temporary
>>>>>>>>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those
>>>>>>>>>>> that make it
>>>>>>>>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced
>>>>>>>>>>> person in
>>>>>>>>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not
>>>>>>>>>>> be a hardship,
>>>>>>>>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in
>>>>>>>>>> his back
>>>>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard
>>>>>>>>> becasue they
>>>>>>>>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's
>>>>>>>>> the solution
>>>>>>>>> for all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't
>>>>>>>> afford
>>>>>>>> to rebuild the house either.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If they are renting then why do they need to rebuild the house? It
>>>>>> isn't _their_ house.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> UHhhh they have to live some where. you idiot. You must be one of the
>>>>> most miserable persons I have ever been exposed to.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, they do. But they are not going to be rebuilding anything, they
>>>> are going to be looking for another place to rent.
>>>>
>>>> That you don't grasp this and find it appropiate to call other people
>>>> stupid when they don't just agree with you says that you are both
>>>> immature and insecure.
>>>>
>>>> And once again I am bored with your bullshit so back into the killfile
>>>> you go.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Grow the fu@k up.
>>> You were being argumentative, judgemental, and very unsympathetic.
>>> Killfile.... pffft.  What grade are you in?
>>
>> <plonk>
>>
>
> So 5th grade, ok.
>
>
I think he kill filed every one. Good, he is gone.
On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
SNIP
>
>"RV" can also be a trailer. I don't imagine you could buy much of a
>class-A motor home for $4000.
Lots of Class C units adequate for emergency purposes for $4000 or
less.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>first time around.
The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 12:50:28 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 9/18/2017 10:15 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> On 9/18/2017 9:26 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>
>>>>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>>
>>>> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>>
>>> Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>>>
>>
>> What do you base that on? I may or may not agree with you depending on
>> the numbers.
>>
>> How much of the presently built up area is in a flood plain? Break down
>> between residential and commercial/industrial.
>>
>> If the flood plains were abandoned, what other space is available to
>> build on?
>>
>> 100 year? 500 year? 5 year? I don't care if you build right on the
>> beach, but don't expect the rest of us to help.
>>
>> There were a lot of places stupidly build in areas that flood and would
>> not be allowed today. I know of an area in Tuckerton NJ that was built
>> in the 1950's right on man made lagoons. Vacation homes, no heat, but
>> right on the ground. Most have long been raised a few feet, some now
>> year round houses that would. Codes have changed in those areas.
>>
>> Never building in a flood prone area would make major differences in
>> where we live and work. It would be interesting to see how it would
>> affect us.
>>
>> Disclosure: My last place of employment was right on a small river and
>> we had 14" of water one time. Took us 3 days to get back in production
>> and we did have flood insurance. Floods was easier to deal with than a
>> fire. Did that ooo.
>
>I think floods would only be easier than a fire if as many homes caught
>fire as those that flooded. A fire typically is an isolated case a
>flood affects the community and takes months to repair, as materials
>become available and mold inspectors certify weeks after the water has
>gone down. And with a flood finding some where else to live becomes an
>issue as most hotels are filled quickly. Grocery stores are closed
>along with gas stations for days if not weeks.
He's not talking about a residential flood. He's talking industrial.
In case of most industrial (and even commercial ) properties, a flood
is a lot less devastating than a fire - and a WHOLE LOT less
devestating than a flood of the same magnatude in a residential area.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:37:24 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 9/12/2017 10:17 AM, dpb wrote:
>> On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
>>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>>
>> And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
>> as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
>>
>> There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
>> shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
>> repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
>> they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
>>
>> --
>>
>
>You mean these are no good?
>
>http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/321960678365?chn=ps&dispItem=1
a 40 footer would be even better for a family home
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> >> ...
> >>
> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
> >> ...
> >>
> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
> >>
> >
> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>
> I was.
> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
> trailer to his septic tank.
...because he could afford to.
>
> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
> head.
> >
...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
the Houston area should just do it.
There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
On 9/12/2017 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
> [email protected] (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com>
>>>
>>> Right, but 2-3 semis with a pair of containers each could probably
>>> have 10-20 containers set up in a day.
>>
>> Have you ever been _in_ a container? 20' by 6' is what, about 120
>> square feet? No Windows, door hardware only on the exterior. No
>> plumbing, No electricity.
>>
>
> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. Shoot,
> you don't even need to make the exterior walls as tough and heavy as you
> would for moving freight. (They still need to be tough and heavy, you'll
> have very rough handling by guys who "know containers.")
>
> I thought they'd be closer to 8', but 6' is still workable.
>
> How many live in cars and vans?
>
>>>
>>> How long do you recon?
>>
>> Ah Reckon...
>>
>
> Ah yes, reckon.
>
> Puckdropper
>
Actually there is/was a show on one of the HIY or H&G channels that
showed homes being built from shipping containers. I would entertain it.
On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> [email protected] wrote in news:asq7rclt5c1mf4brd2gu4j5m5jkfpslfpc@
> 4ax.com:
>
> > Actually yes.Complete and driveable. Might not pass any safety
> > inspectiom, but as I said - adequate for emergency use. Even if you
> > scrap it after 3 months it's cheaper than a motel.
> > Also some old Class A units - with big gas guzzling V8 engines and
> > even a few old bus conversions.
> > Something I'd travel accross the continent with? Definitely not - but
> > something to keep you warm and dry, and secure - most definitely. With
> > working appliances even, so you can cook meals and keep the beer cold.
>
> One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay for
> a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you could
> load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.
Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading equipment can
be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation step to the set-up process.
> Instant
> temporary apartment complex, good for a month or so for things to get
> going again.
A month or so isn't going to be enough. It'll take a lot longer than that to set up
long term temporary housing.
>
> They're supposed to be small and cramped, you don't want people thinking
> they're going to live there for any length of time. Shoot, weld down the
> beds and everything but the chairs for "transportation reasons" but also
> to keep people from moving stuff out to move stuff in.
Ventilation could be an issue. You need windows, fans, heaters, etc. Heck, FEMA
got screwed on trailers that were designed to be lived in. Imagine all the issues with
housing people in converted shipping containers. The lawyers are already salivating.
Besides, the gathering of the containers and beds, the cleaning, the welding,
the set-up etc. all take the "instant" part out of the equation.
[email protected] wrote:
> They can stored in Guam, in such a way to either counterbalance the
> military masses, or just to balance their own weight so as to prevent
> the island from capsizing ;)
LOL! https://www.youtube.com/embed/cesSRfXqS1Q?rel=0
https://www.youtube.com/embed/oAEqXubT21I?rel=0
On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 22:47:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On 15 Sep 2017 03:56:00 GMT, Puckdropper
><puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>>>
>>> Where would you store them? Considering we now know where they are
>>> needed, where would you have stored them prior to Harvey and Irma.
>>>
>>> Would enough containers have been delivered to Barbuda prior to Irma?
>>> The Keys? The coastal areas around Houston - e.g. the small towns and
>>> villages, etc.?
>>>
>>> Do you load up California in anticipation of the Big One? If so,
>>> where? Everywhere?
>>>
>>> How do you determine where the next disaster will strike? How do keep
>>> them ready for use when they may sit fior decades?
>>>
>>
>>You'd want them to be stored within easy distance of rail lines, because
>>on land railroads are the way to move them efficiently. I'd probably
>>scatter them about: a small pile in Chicago, a small pile in Cheyenne, a
>>small pile in Kansas City. Maybe about a train's or two's worth. That
>>way, when disaster hits the trains can all originate at different points
>>and hopefully won't disrupt too much traffic on the railroads.
>>
>>Some prestaging may be useful, but you'd probably be better off loading
>>the trains as the storm is hitting rather than trying to prestage and
>>finding the forecast was wrong.
>
>Or the units damaged by the storm.
Hate to have 200 container homes floating around Houston or the Bif
Eazy during the storm - - - -
On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:51:13 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:08:58 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] writes:
>>>>On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>>first time around.
>>>>>
>>>>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>>
>>>>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>>cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>
>>>Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
>>>flooded out vehicles.
>>
>>...and what about the other side of the equation. Leftys never look
>>at the whole picture.
>
>
>Please, enlighten us as to the "other side of the equation". Demonstrate
>your superior education in economics.
Sell your insurance co stocks, and don't bitch when your insurance
rates fo up
[email protected] writes:
>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:51:13 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>wrote:
>
>>[email protected] writes:
>>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:08:58 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>[email protected] writes:
>>>>>On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>>>first time around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>>>
>>>>>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>>>cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>>
>>>>Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
>>>>flooded out vehicles.
>>>
>>>...and what about the other side of the equation. Leftys never look
>>>at the whole picture.
>>
>>
>>Please, enlighten us as to the "other side of the equation". Demonstrate
>>your superior education in economics.
>
>OK, I know it won't help a lefty understand economics (an
>impossibility)
> but the opportunity lost from the money that now has to
>go into replacing those vehicles exceeds the economic gain from the
>companies making the replacements.
As you'll note above, the statement was simply that it's likely that
the automakers will have higher output the next couple of quarters, which
may make investing in them more attractive. In no way can the
statement be confused as making any comment on the overall economic picture
related to the replacement.
As usual, you've jumped to a conclusion that allows you namecall, like
any 4th grader.
>
Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
and the inability of congress to write rules restricting the application of
government backed flood insurance to locations that should never have
been built-on in the first place. Perhaps pay off once, but never again
for the same property.
On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:51:13 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:08:58 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] writes:
>>>>On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>>first time around.
>>>>>
>>>>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>>
>>>>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>>cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>
>>>Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
>>>flooded out vehicles.
>>
>>...and what about the other side of the equation. Leftys never look
>>at the whole picture.
>
>
>Please, enlighten us as to the "other side of the equation". Demonstrate
>your superior education in economics.
OK, I know it won't help a lefty understand economics (an
impossibility) but the opportunity lost from the money that now has to
go into replacing those vehicles exceeds the economic gain from the
companies making the replacements.
[email protected] wrote in news:asq7rclt5c1mf4brd2gu4j5m5jkfpslfpc@
4ax.com:
> Actually yes.Complete and driveable. Might not pass any safety
> inspectiom, but as I said - adequate for emergency use. Even if you
> scrap it after 3 months it's cheaper than a motel.
> Also some old Class A units - with big gas guzzling V8 engines and
> even a few old bus conversions.
> Something I'd travel accross the continent with? Definitely not - but
> something to keep you warm and dry, and secure - most definitely. With
> working appliances even, so you can cook meals and keep the beer cold.
One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay for
a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you could
load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot. Instant
temporary apartment complex, good for a month or so for things to get
going again.
They're supposed to be small and cramped, you don't want people thinking
they're going to live there for any length of time. Shoot, weld down the
beds and everything but the chairs for "transportation reasons" but also
to keep people from moving stuff out to move stuff in.
Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!
[email protected] writes:
>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:08:58 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>wrote:
>
>>[email protected] writes:
>>>On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>first time around.
>>>>
>>>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>
>>>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>cat-4 hurricanes.
>>
>>Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
>>flooded out vehicles.
>
>...and what about the other side of the equation. Leftys never look
>at the whole picture.
Please, enlighten us as to the "other side of the equation". Demonstrate
your superior education in economics.
On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 06:58:26 -0400, G Ross <[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>first time around.
>>>
>>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>
>> Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>> cat-4 hurricanes.
>>
>Downed trees are good for the local economy. All the bearded
>backwoodsmen are swarming around in their pickups with a chainsaw and
>a trailer. Let them make a little money off the storm, I say.
That paragraph shows great ignorance of economics.
On 9/14/2017 11:38 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 06:58:26 -0400, G Ross <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>> first time around.
>>>>
>>>> The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>> stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>> did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>
>>> Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>> cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>
>> Downed trees are good for the local economy. All the bearded
>> backwoodsmen are swarming around in their pickups with a chainsaw and
>> a trailer. Let them make a little money off the storm, I say.
>
> That paragraph shows great ignorance of economics.
>
As did this one.
Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
cat-4 hurricanes.
On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:08:58 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>>On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>first time around.
>>>
>>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>
>>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>cat-4 hurricanes.
>
>Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
>flooded out vehicles.
...and what about the other side of the equation. Leftys never look
at the whole picture.
On 15 Sep 2017 03:56:00 GMT, Puckdropper
<puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>>
>> Where would you store them? Considering we now know where they are
>> needed, where would you have stored them prior to Harvey and Irma.
>>
>> Would enough containers have been delivered to Barbuda prior to Irma?
>> The Keys? The coastal areas around Houston - e.g. the small towns and
>> villages, etc.?
>>
>> Do you load up California in anticipation of the Big One? If so,
>> where? Everywhere?
>>
>> How do you determine where the next disaster will strike? How do keep
>> them ready for use when they may sit fior decades?
>>
>
>You'd want them to be stored within easy distance of rail lines, because
>on land railroads are the way to move them efficiently. I'd probably
>scatter them about: a small pile in Chicago, a small pile in Cheyenne, a
>small pile in Kansas City. Maybe about a train's or two's worth. That
>way, when disaster hits the trains can all originate at different points
>and hopefully won't disrupt too much traffic on the railroads.
>
>Some prestaging may be useful, but you'd probably be better off loading
>the trains as the storm is hitting rather than trying to prestage and
>finding the forecast was wrong.
Or the units damaged by the storm.
DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4,
> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay
>> for a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you
>> could load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.
>
> Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading
> equipment can be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation
> step to the set-up process.
Right, but 2-3 semis with a pair of containers each could probably have
10-20 containers set up in a day.
>> Instant
>> temporary apartment complex, good for a month or so for things to get
>> going again.
>
> A month or so isn't going to be enough. It'll take a lot longer than
> that to set up long term temporary housing.
How long do you recon?
>>
>> They're supposed to be small and cramped, you don't want people
>> thinking they're going to live there for any length of time. Shoot,
>> weld down the beds and everything but the chairs for "transportation
>> reasons" but also to keep people from moving stuff out to move stuff
>> in.
>
> Ventilation could be an issue. You need windows, fans, heaters, etc.
> Heck, FEMA got screwed on trailers that were designed to be lived in.
> Imagine all the issues with housing people in converted shipping
> containers. The lawyers are already salivating.
>
> Besides, the gathering of the containers and beds, the cleaning, the
> welding, the set-up etc. all take the "instant" part out of the
> equation.
>
Good point about the ventilation. That kind of stuff would cut into the
living space severely. There's also the little matter of waste
extraction.
Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!
On 9/14/2017 12:00 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 11:45:35 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
> wrote:
>
>> On 9/14/2017 11:38 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 06:58:26 -0400, G Ross <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>>> first time around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>>> stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>>> did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>>> cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>>>
>>>> Downed trees are good for the local economy. All the bearded
>>>> backwoodsmen are swarming around in their pickups with a chainsaw and
>>>> a trailer. Let them make a little money off the storm, I say.
>>>
>>> That paragraph shows great ignorance of economics.
>>>
>> As did this one.
>>
>> Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>> cat-4 hurricanes.
>
> No, that was a sarcastic response. The second sentence should have
> made that pretty clear.
>
>
OK. ;~) Mind you I have a very good friend/neighbor that moved here
almost 7 years from Indiana. He was way anxious to go through a
hurricane. I warned him a few years ago to be careful what you wish
for. His home is actually the lowest point in our neighborhood and he
had water up to his front porch. He wants nothing to do with a
hurricane ever again..and he had no damage at all. I just get a little
touchy when it comes to hurricanes and what they bring.
On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 11:45:35 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet>
wrote:
>On 9/14/2017 11:38 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 06:58:26 -0400, G Ross <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>> first time around.
>>>>>
>>>>> The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>> stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>> did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>>
>>>> Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>> cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>>
>>> Downed trees are good for the local economy. All the bearded
>>> backwoodsmen are swarming around in their pickups with a chainsaw and
>>> a trailer. Let them make a little money off the storm, I say.
>>
>> That paragraph shows great ignorance of economics.
>>
>As did this one.
>
>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>cat-4 hurricanes.
No, that was a sarcastic response. The second sentence should have
made that pretty clear.
[email protected] (Scott Lurndal) wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com>
>>
>>Right, but 2-3 semis with a pair of containers each could probably
>>have 10-20 containers set up in a day.
>
> Have you ever been _in_ a container? 20' by 6' is what, about 120
> square feet? No Windows, door hardware only on the exterior. No
> plumbing, No electricity.
>
Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. Shoot,
you don't even need to make the exterior walls as tough and heavy as you
would for moving freight. (They still need to be tough and heavy, you'll
have very rough handling by guys who "know containers.")
I thought they'd be closer to 8', but 6' is still workable.
How many live in cars and vans?
>>
>>How long do you recon?
>
> Ah Reckon...
>
Ah yes, reckon.
Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!
On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 08:29:20 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 23:28:01 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>SNIP
>>>
>>>"RV" can also be a trailer. I don't imagine you could buy much of a
>>>class-A motor home for $4000.
>>Lots of Class C units adequate for emergency purposes for $4000 or
>>less.
>
>With the vehicle? Nothing roadworthy, for sure.
"With the vehicle"? A class C _is_ the vehicle.
On 9/12/2017 12:37 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/12/2017 10:17 AM, dpb wrote:
>> On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it
>>> could
>>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>>
>> And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose
>> might as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did
>> that.
>>
>> There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
>> shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
>> repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space
>> but they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
>>
>> --
>>
>
> You mean these are no good?
>
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/321960678365?chn=ps&dispItem=1
>
Interesting reads
https://www.curbed.com/2017/6/21/15839730/shipping-container-house-for-sale-buy
https://www.containerhomeplans.org/2015/04/what-i-wish-id-known-before-building-my-shipping-container-home/
Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4,
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>> One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay
>>> for a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you
>>> could load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.
>>
>> Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading
>> equipment can be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation
>> step to the set-up process.
>
>Right, but 2-3 semis with a pair of containers each could probably have
>10-20 containers set up in a day.
Have you ever been _in_ a container? 20' by 6' is what, about 120 square
feet? No Windows, door hardware only on the exterior. No plumbing,
No electricity.
>
>>> Instant
>>> temporary apartment complex, good for a month or so for things to get
>>> going again.
>>
>> A month or so isn't going to be enough. It'll take a lot longer than
>> that to set up long term temporary housing.
>
>How long do you recon?
Ah Reckon...
On 9/18/2017 5:52 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/18/2017 1:50 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 9/18/2017 10:15 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Never building in a flood prone area would make major differences in
>>> where we live and work. It would be interesting to see how it would
>>> affect us.
>>>
>>> Disclosure:Â My last place of employment was right on a small river
>>> and we had 14" of water one time. Took us 3 days to get back in
>>> production and we did have flood insurance. Floods was easier to
>>> deal with than a fire. Did that ooo.
>>
>> I think floods would only be easier than a fire if as many homes
>> caught fire as those that flooded. A fire typically is an isolated
>> case a flood affects the community and takes months to repair, as
>> materials become available and mold inspectors certify weeks after the
>> water has gone down. And with a flood finding some where else to live
>> becomes an issue as most hotels are filled quickly. Grocery stores
>> are closed along with gas stations for days if not weeks.
>
> Depends on circumstances and I speak from limited experience so blanket
> statements not implied
> Our flood was only 14 inches so some motors had to be dried and bearings
> replaced. We knew it was coming so we moved a lot of stuff off the
> floor. Some loss of raw materials on lower part of a pallet. Had it been
> higher, machine control panels would have been damaged. We were down
> for only 3 days.
>
> Two fires, fifteen years apart with two different companies. Both were
> 6 months down. Our equipment was not lost but had smoke and minor water
> damage as the actual fire was on the other side of a wall.
>
> Flood cost was about $100,000, fire cost exceeded $2 million. Good
> insurance, including business interruption insurance.
Sorry, I was speaking more in context with the thread.
On 9/16/2017 7:18 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>
>> [email protected] writes:
>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:51:13 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [email protected] writes:
>>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:08:58 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> [email protected] writes:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>>>>> first time around.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>>>>> stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>>>>> did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>>>>> cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
>>>>>> flooded out vehicles.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and what about the other side of the equation. Leftys never look
>>>>> at the whole picture.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please, enlighten us as to the "other side of the equation". Demonstrate
>>>> your superior education in economics.
>>>
>>> OK, I know it won't help a lefty understand economics (an
>>> impossibility)
>>
>>> but the opportunity lost from the money that now has to
>>> go into replacing those vehicles exceeds the economic gain from the
>>> companies making the replacements.
>>
>> As you'll note above, the statement was simply that it's likely that
>> the automakers will have higher output the next couple of quarters, which
>> may make investing in them more attractive. In no way can the
>> statement be confused as making any comment on the overall economic picture
>> related to the replacement.
>>
>> As usual, you've jumped to a conclusion that allows you namecall, like
>> any 4th grader.
>>
>>>
>>
>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>
> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
No, you simply do not build at all in those zones.
>
>> and the inability of congress to write rules restricting the application of
>> government backed flood insurance to locations that should never have
>> been built-on in the first place. Perhaps pay off once, but never again
>> for the same property.
>
> The whole point of goverment flood compensation (it's not "insurance"
> in anything but name) is that it pays for damage to properties that no
> insurer in their right mind would cover.
>
Still clueless? Flood insurance is sold by insurance companies and is
backed by the government, FEMA FEMA will "LOAN" money to those that
have no flood insurance
On 9/18/2017 1:50 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 9/18/2017 10:15 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>> Never building in a flood prone area would make major differences in
>> where we live and work. It would be interesting to see how it would
>> affect us.
>>
>> Disclosure:Â My last place of employment was right on a small river
>> and we had 14" of water one time. Took us 3 days to get back in
>> production and we did have flood insurance. Floods was easier to deal
>> with than a fire. Did that ooo.
>
> I think floods would only be easier than a fire if as many homes caught
> fire as those that flooded. A fire typically is an isolated case a
> flood affects the community and takes months to repair, as materials
> become available and mold inspectors certify weeks after the water has
> gone down. And with a flood finding some where else to live becomes an
> issue as most hotels are filled quickly. Grocery stores are closed
> along with gas stations for days if not weeks.
Depends on circumstances and I speak from limited experience so blanket
statements not implied
Our flood was only 14 inches so some motors had to be dried and bearings
replaced. We knew it was coming so we moved a lot of stuff off the
floor. Some loss of raw materials on lower part of a pallet. Had it been
higher, machine control panels would have been damaged. We were down
for only 3 days.
Two fires, fifteen years apart with two different companies. Both were
6 months down. Our equipment was not lost but had smoke and minor water
damage as the actual fire was on the other side of a wall.
Flood cost was about $100,000, fire cost exceeded $2 million. Good
insurance, including business interruption insurance.
J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>
>So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
On 9/16/2017 8:18 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>
>> and the inability of congress to write rules restricting the application of
>> government backed flood insurance to locations that should never have
>> been built-on in the first place. Perhaps pay off once, but never again
>> for the same property.
>
> The whole point of government flood compensation (it's not "insurance"
> in anything but name) is that it pays for damage to properties that no
> insurer in their right mind would cover.
>
It is one thing to insure in a 500 year floor plain and something else
for houses built right on the beach. I don't feel to bad for someone
that builds 40 feet from the high tide line. It is not "if" but "when"
and don't ask me for a handout to rebuild your $3million beach house.
On 9/18/2017 10:15 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/18/2017 9:26 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>
>>>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>
>>> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>
>> Again with the strawman.  Why build anything in a flood zone?
>>
>
> What do you base that on? I may or may not agree with you depending on
> the numbers.
>
> How much of the presently built up area is in a flood plain? Break down
> between residential and commercial/industrial.
>
> If the flood plains were abandoned, what other space is available to
> build on?
>
> 100 year? 500 year? 5 year? I don't care if you build right on the
> beach, but don't expect the rest of us to help.
>
> There were a lot of places stupidly build in areas that flood and would
> not be allowed today. I know of an area in Tuckerton NJ that was built
> in the 1950's right on man made lagoons. Vacation homes, no heat, but
> right on the ground. Most have long been raised a few feet, some now
> year round houses that would. Codes have changed in those areas.
>
> Never building in a flood prone area would make major differences in
> where we live and work. It would be interesting to see how it would
> affect us.
>
> Disclosure:Â My last place of employment was right on a small river and
> we had 14" of water one time. Took us 3 days to get back in production
> and we did have flood insurance. Floods was easier to deal with than a
> fire. Did that ooo.
I think floods would only be easier than a fire if as many homes caught
fire as those that flooded. A fire typically is an isolated case a
flood affects the community and takes months to repair, as materials
become available and mold inspectors certify weeks after the water has
gone down. And with a flood finding some where else to live becomes an
issue as most hotels are filled quickly. Grocery stores are closed
along with gas stations for days if not weeks.
On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:51:13 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] writes:
>>>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:08:58 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>[email protected] writes:
>>>>>>On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>>>>first time around.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>>>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>>>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>>>>cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>>>
>>>>>Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
>>>>>flooded out vehicles.
>>>>
>>>>...and what about the other side of the equation. Leftys never look
>>>>at the whole picture.
>>>
>>>
>>>Please, enlighten us as to the "other side of the equation". Demonstrate
>>>your superior education in economics.
>>
>>OK, I know it won't help a lefty understand economics (an
>>impossibility)
>
>> but the opportunity lost from the money that now has to
>>go into replacing those vehicles exceeds the economic gain from the
>>companies making the replacements.
>
>As you'll note above, the statement was simply that it's likely that
>the automakers will have higher output the next couple of quarters, which
>may make investing in them more attractive. In no way can the
>statement be confused as making any comment on the overall economic picture
>related to the replacement.
No, the implication is that it the economy is improved. It's
certainly not, though GDP might be (since it's an artificial number).
>As usual, you've jumped to a conclusion that allows you namecall, like
>any 4th grader.
I would never overestimate a lefty, such as yourself.
On 9/18/2017 9:26 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>
>>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>
>> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>
> Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>
What do you base that on? I may or may not agree with you depending on
the numbers.
How much of the presently built up area is in a flood plain? Break down
between residential and commercial/industrial.
If the flood plains were abandoned, what other space is available to
build on?
100 year? 500 year? 5 year? I don't care if you build right on the
beach, but don't expect the rest of us to help.
There were a lot of places stupidly build in areas that flood and would
not be allowed today. I know of an area in Tuckerton NJ that was built
in the 1950's right on man made lagoons. Vacation homes, no heat, but
right on the ground. Most have long been raised a few feet, some now
year round houses that would. Codes have changed in those areas.
Never building in a flood prone area would make major differences in
where we live and work. It would be interesting to see how it would
affect us.
Disclosure: My last place of employment was right on a small river and
we had 14" of water one time. Took us 3 days to get back in production
and we did have flood insurance. Floods was easier to deal with than a
fire. Did that ooo.
On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 16:51:13 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>[email protected] writes:
>>>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 13:08:58 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>[email protected] writes:
>>>>>>On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:08:53 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 22:24:02 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>>>>>>>first time around.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The people in Indiana who built most of them might disagree, the
>>>>>>>stories of bad trailers are likely the one that got the most press. It
>>>>>>>did pump money into Indiana to people who needed it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Broken windows are great for the economy. Too bad we don't have more
>>>>>>cat-4 hurricanes.
>>>>>
>>>>>Buy your automaker stocks now - they're about to replace 700,000+
>>>>>flooded out vehicles.
>>>>
>>>>...and what about the other side of the equation. Leftys never look
>>>>at the whole picture.
>>>
>>>
>>>Please, enlighten us as to the "other side of the equation". Demonstrate
>>>your superior education in economics.
>>
>>OK, I know it won't help a lefty understand economics (an
>>impossibility)
>
>> but the opportunity lost from the money that now has to
>>go into replacing those vehicles exceeds the economic gain from the
>>companies making the replacements.
>
>As you'll note above, the statement was simply that it's likely that
>the automakers will have higher output the next couple of quarters, which
>may make investing in them more attractive. In no way can the
>statement be confused as making any comment on the overall economic picture
>related to the replacement.
>
>As usual, you've jumped to a conclusion that allows you namecall, like
>any 4th grader.
>
>>
>
>Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>and the inability of congress to write rules restricting the application of
>government backed flood insurance to locations that should never have
>been built-on in the first place. Perhaps pay off once, but never again
>for the same property.
The whole point of goverment flood compensation (it's not "insurance"
in anything but name) is that it pays for damage to properties that no
insurer in their right mind would cover.
On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 08:29:20 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 23:28:01 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>SNIP
>>>
>>>"RV" can also be a trailer. I don't imagine you could buy much of a
>>>class-A motor home for $4000.
>>Lots of Class C units adequate for emergency purposes for $4000 or
>>less.
>
>With the vehicle? Nothing roadworthy, for sure.
Actually yes.Complete and driveable. Might not pass any safety
inspectiom, but as I said - adequate for emergency use. Even if you
scrap it after 3 months it's cheaper than a motel.
Also some old Class A units - with big gas guzzling V8 engines and
even a few old bus conversions.
Something I'd travel accross the continent with? Definitely not - but
something to keep you warm and dry, and secure - most definitely. With
working appliances even, so you can cook meals and keep the beer cold.
They can stored in Guam, in such a way to either counterbalance the military masses, or just to balance their own weight so as to prevent the island from capsizing ;)
On Wednesday, September 13, 2017 at 1:17:08 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 09:30:29 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On 9/13/2017 6:41 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 10:24:07 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
> >>>> ...
> >>>>
> >>>>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
> >>>>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
> >>>>
> >>>> And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
> >>>> as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
> >>>
> >>> I think the idea is that these intermodal containers could be shipped
> >>> where they're needed using existing infrastructure and *stored* until
> >>> needed. The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
> >>> first time around.
> >>
> >> Where would you store them? Considering we now know where they are needed, where
> >> would you have stored them prior to Harvey and Irma.
> >>
> >> Would enough containers have been delivered to Barbuda prior to Irma? The Keys? The
> >> coastal areas around Houston - e.g. the small towns and villages, etc.?
> >>
> >> Do you load up California in anticipation of the Big One? If so, where? Everywhere?
> >>
> >> How do you determine where the next disaster will strike? How do keep them ready for use
> >> when they may sit fior decades?
> >>
> >
> >>
> >
> >It can have benefits. They can be stored in much less space than a FEMA
> >trailer since containers stack well. You can transport 12,000 of them
> >on a single ship. Of course, then you need the supporting
> >infrastructure to handle the ship, the loading/unloading and the
> >tractors to move them to final location. Trains can move them too, but
> >you still need the right equipment on the rails.
> >
> >It is not a single solution to all housing needs but I can see it as a
> >benefit is some areas. Just one piece of a well planed pie.
>
> Exactly. Something that can be done _before_ it's needed.
On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 09:30:29 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 9/13/2017 6:41 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 10:24:07 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
>>>>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>>>>
>>>> And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
>>>> as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
>>>
>>> I think the idea is that these intermodal containers could be shipped
>>> where they're needed using existing infrastructure and *stored* until
>>> needed. The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>>> first time around.
>>
>> Where would you store them? Considering we now know where they are needed, where
>> would you have stored them prior to Harvey and Irma.
>>
>> Would enough containers have been delivered to Barbuda prior to Irma? The Keys? The
>> coastal areas around Houston - e.g. the small towns and villages, etc.?
>>
>> Do you load up California in anticipation of the Big One? If so, where? Everywhere?
>>
>> How do you determine where the next disaster will strike? How do keep them ready for use
>> when they may sit fior decades?
>>
>
>>
>
>It can have benefits. They can be stored in much less space than a FEMA
>trailer since containers stack well. You can transport 12,000 of them
>on a single ship. Of course, then you need the supporting
>infrastructure to handle the ship, the loading/unloading and the
>tractors to move them to final location. Trains can move them too, but
>you still need the right equipment on the rails.
>
>It is not a single solution to all housing needs but I can see it as a
>benefit is some areas. Just one piece of a well planed pie.
Exactly. Something that can be done _before_ it's needed.
On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 08:46:44 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Sep 2017 08:41:22 -0400, J. Clarke
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 22:58:55 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 22:19:27 -0400, J. Clarke
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:11:00 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> I was.
>>>>>>>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>>> >> head.
>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>>>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>>>>for all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>>>>>>>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>>>>>>>regard for the folks here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
>>>>>>Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
>>>>>
>>>>>Isn't that where the tradesmen park and where supplies for the rebuild
>>>>>are delivered?
>>>>
>>>>That's what the _yard_ is for. And the tradesmen park in the street.
>>>
>>>Do you block your driveway when contractors show up? I sure don't.
>>
>>So you move your boat and your camping trailer into the street when
>>workmen show up so they can park where those are normally kept? Most
>>residential driveways don't have enough space for the entire crew that
>>builds a house to park.
>
>Good Lord, you're dense. Nevermind. Argue with someone else about
>something.
Hey, you're the one coming up with lame arguments why somebody can't
live in an RV for a while while their house is being repaired. I'm
just pointing out that they're lame.
On 9/12/2017 10:17 AM, dpb wrote:
> On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
> ...
>
>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>
> And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
> as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
>
> There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
> shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
> repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
> they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
>
> --
>
You mean these are no good?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/321960678365?chn=ps&dispItem=1
On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
...
> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
--
On 9/20/2017 8:23 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Leon <[email protected]> writes:
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 23:34:06 -0400, J. Clarke
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>>>>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>>>>
>>>>> Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>>>>
>>>> If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit
>>>> blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it
>>>> means.
>>>>
>>> No need for "zoning" at all. Just stop subsidizing flood insurance.
>>> If you want to build below sea level, have at it.
>>>
>>
>> Much of the flooding in the Houston area was 100' above sea level.
>> Elevation does not guarantee against flooding.
>> Our home is at 98'. Water only came up over our curb. Homes 1 mile north
>> of us are are at 100' and had 18" of water in their homes.
>>
>
> Yet, they built houses in a "reservoir" (barker/addicks), right?
>
> 'Those homes should probably never have been built. Now they'll be
> flooded for quite some time: "Homes upstream will be impacted for
> an extended period of time while water is released from the
> reservoirs," the Corps wrote in a press release. The reservoirs
> will take between one to three months to drain.'
>
Absolutely true!
Actually the water in the Barker reservoir are already high and dry
again so to speak and have been for about 5 days.
It is shocking that we have had major flooding in the Houston area for
the last 3 years. Those in the reservoir saw flooding almost reach
their homes in the past couple of years. 5 in 6 still chose to not buy
flood insurance and are blaming the government for this and think they
should have been told that this would happen. They are blaming the
engineers for not opening the flood gates earlier. The reservoir filled
in 2 days, it was in its normal state of "empty". And as you mentioned
above it will take months to drain from that flood gate. They refuse to
understand that it is no one's fault except for the developers,
builders, realtors, and ultimate themselves for being ignorant about
where their homes were built.
They are under the assumption that if you are not required to buy flood
insurance your home will not flood. I have explained to them time and
again that the mortgage companies may require flood insurance to protect
their investment. Pay cash for your home and you don't have to pay for
any insurance at all.
But the comment I made refers to any elevation. If there is an issue
with the drains, high elevations can flood.
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 23:34:06 -0400, J. Clarke
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>
>>> J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>
>>>>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>>
>>>> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>>
>>> Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>>
>> If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit
>> blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it
>> means.
>>
> No need for "zoning" at all. Just stop subsidizing flood insurance.
> If you want to build below sea level, have at it.
>
Much of the flooding in the Houston area was 100' above sea level.
Elevation does not guarantee against flooding.
Our home is at 98'. Water only came up over our curb. Homes 1 mile north
of us are are at 100' and had 18" of water in their homes.
Leon <[email protected]> writes:
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 23:34:06 -0400, J. Clarke
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>>>
>>>>>> Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>>>> the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>>>
>>>>> So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>>>
>>>> Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>>>
>>> If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit
>>> blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it
>>> means.
>>>
>> No need for "zoning" at all. Just stop subsidizing flood insurance.
>> If you want to build below sea level, have at it.
>>
>
>Much of the flooding in the Houston area was 100' above sea level.
>Elevation does not guarantee against flooding.
>Our home is at 98'. Water only came up over our curb. Homes 1 mile north
>of us are are at 100' and had 18" of water in their homes.
>
Yet, they built houses in a "reservoir" (barker/addicks), right?
'Those homes should probably never have been built. Now they'll be
flooded for quite some time: "Homes upstream will be impacted for
an extended period of time while water is released from the
reservoirs," the Corps wrote in a press release. The reservoirs
will take between one to three months to drain.'
On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 23:34:06 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>wrote:
>
>>J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>
>>>>Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>>the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>
>>>So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>
>>Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>
>If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit
>blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it
>means.
>
No need for "zoning" at all. Just stop subsidizing flood insurance.
If you want to build below sea level, have at it.
On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>
>>>Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>
>>So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>
>Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
Which would leave half of the southern coastal USA swampland - like
it was before the developers moved in.
On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 23:34:06 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>wrote:
>
>>J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>
>>>>Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>>the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>>
>>>So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>>
>>Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
>
>If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit
>blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it
>means.
>
Up here in the Grand River watershed ANYTHING you do in the "flood
plane" needs approval from the GRCA - the Grand River Conservation
Authority.
On Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:26:14 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>J. Clarke <[email protected]> writes:
>>On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 17:25:38 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>
>>>Now, you want to talk politics, we can discuss the lack of zoning in
>>>the Houston area that led to many houses being built in flood zones,
>>
>>So it's better if factories or stores or farms are in flood zones?
>
>Again with the strawman. Why build anything in a flood zone?
If you don't want stuff built in flood zones you need to quit
blathering about "zoning". It doesn't mean what you seem to think it
means.
On 9/1/2017 10:25 AM, Jack wrote:
> On 8/30/2017 1:23 PM, Leon wrote:
>>
>> I has not rained in the Houston are in the past 24 hours. In our
>> immediate area it is almost like it did not happen.
>> Streets in adjacent neighborhoods, south of the Barker reservoir are
>> seeing the water empty from their streets quickly.
>>
>> We are 1 mile south of the reservoir.
>>
>> This morning I walked up to and over the reservoir and down the other
>> side. It is still flooded but, thank GOD, the water is receding. I
>> went there to specifically look for a high water mark. And fortunately
>> it was there indicating that the high point has been reached, probably
>> 3~4 feet from spilling over the spillway. The limit is 104.4', I think
>> it crested at around 110.5'
>>
>> And this picture, taken this morning, looks great compared to thousands
>> of other places in the Houston area.
>> This is the top of the Barker Reservoir on the SW end of the
>> levee/spillway at Peek Road, for those that are familiar.
>>
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36113047373/in/dateposted-public/
>>
>> This is the shallow end of the reservoir it goes about 5~8 miles east
>> and north from here and only gets deeper.
>>
> What amazes me is how little water is around after 5 FEET of rain. If
> Pgh got 5 feet of rain, everything not on a mountain top would be under
> 100 feet of water. We got 4 INCHES of rain in an hour once, and the
> valley between my house and the next mountain got a 20 foot wall of
> water that killed a bunch of people, including my uncle, when their
> vehicles got washed away.
>
The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to be
around for weeks.
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> just about an hour ago.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>
> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>
> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
> changing.
>
> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>
> Leon
It's good to hear you and your neighbors remain pretty much
unscathed! Looking back, do you think a mandatory evacuation should
have been issued by Houston's mayor before Harvey made landfall?
I've not heard _anything_ on the news as to metro Houston's tap
water, is it safe to drink or bottled water only?
Storm chaser, Jeff Piotrowski live-streamed the most incredible video
from the eye-wall - briefly in Fulton:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/U4fUdJBlrtQ?autoplay=1
... then from Rockport during landfall:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/OH-l83EUsIw?autoplay=1
On 8/28/2017 7:47 PM, Leon wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> just about an hour ago.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>
> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>
> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
> changing.
>
> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>
> Leon
>
>
>
Thank you all for your kind and supporting words. This is only the
first 4 days of an extremely long trip to recovery. It will take
several years.
Please continue to put all in your prayers.
On 8/29/2017 1:19 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 9:15:34 AM UTC-5, Spalted Walt wrote:
>
>> It's good to hear you and your neighbors remain pretty much
>> unscathed! Looking back, do you think a mandatory evacuation should
>> have been issued by Houston's mayor before Harvey made landfall?
>
> I grew up in Houston and was there during some of the worst storms they have had. They have decades of experience in how to handle this type of situation, from hurricanes, tropical storms, and their attendant wind and flood damage.
>
> This has been explained carefully to the people of Texas, addressed by our governor and the mayor of Houston. They have had evacuations before, and that added more trauma, deaths, and impossible rescue situations. Houston and the surrounding areas have a lot of low lying areas and constantly flowing waterways.
>
> When they flood, they the people fleeing are in panic. It isn't a controlled classroom evacuation where each child waits their turn to exit. It is full blown panic with everyone trying to save themselves and their families. So an evacuation order would have put literally MILLIONS of people on the road (pop. Houston metropolitan are 3 million, Houston proper 2.4) causing a complete deadlock of traffic. Millions would be trapped in their vehicles. Now add the people fleeing our coastlines that travel through Houston to get away; some fleeing due to their good sense, and others from mandatory orders to evacuate.
>
> Next, add all the rest of the people fleeing all the surrounding cities and counties. What they are missing in the national news feed is that the flooding extended 150 miles around Houston. 30 minutes from my house, one of the rivers is 10' out of its "flood stage mark. 125 miles from Houston, the Colorado river is some unbelievable number of feet out of its bank, and has not risen to this height in over 100 years. People that have never seen flooding are leaving their houses and businesses as they have several feet of water in them, adding to more highway jams.
>
> If you notice, since so many rescues were required during the last catastrophic flooding, there are very few vehicles on the streets this time. The highways are vacant. The advice to Houstonians was to "shelter in place". This has allowed not only professionals to have access to roadways (now serving as boatways) without worrying about people trapped in their vehicles in miles long traffic jams.
>
> It is REMARKABLE that this strategy has worked so well. The people in Houston and the surrounding areas have banded together to rescue as many as possible. I have the local news on now, and they just said from the Houston affiliate that they are now receiving 1,000 calls an hour for emergency rescues.
>
> Just as remarkable, and for those doubting the strategy, think about this:
>
> No one saw this storm turning around three times. It is the worst tropical storm/hurricane in history at this point, and it is far from finished. Yet, it has claimed to this point only 3 deaths. It is awful to have any, but considering the circumstances it is incredible to have single digit loss of life.
All well said but the death toll has added a police officer that left to
do his duty despite his wife's suggestion to not go into work today.
His answer to her was that he had a job to do. His patrol car stalled
in a swift water crossing and he drwoned.
A true HERO in every sense of the word. Our prayers go to his wife and
family.
In a similar situation a van with grand parents and several children
that were evacuating was swept away. An uncle the driver was able to
escape and cling to a tree for an hour before being rescued. The van
has not been found.
Unfortunately there will probably be countless more deaths.
Again our prayers go out to those families that are affected.
>
>> I've not heard _anything_ on the news as to metro Houston's tap
>> water, is it safe to drink or bottled water only?
>
> My sister lives in the area of Houston that was the hardest hit. She has one of the highest elevation houses in the higher elevation area of the floods. They had about 4' of water in their front yard/street, and about 2' in their house. Down the street, there are houses with 6-8' of water in them. The water us receding, and some areas of Houston are opening up, despite the rain.
>
> They have no power, no food, most people have no way to cook or heat anything,no fresh water, and there is a "boil" order in effect for any water you get that doesn't come from a sealed container. I would like to take them some supplies, but they have advised that the city wants to keep the highways clear for the traffic that NEEDS to go in and out of the city. I am hoping to be able to make it there by the weekend.
>
> Here in San Antonio (they are three hours away, in Texas terms "down the road"), they have mounted a fleet of buses and are going to bring about 12,000 refugees to our shelters from Houston to add to the 4,000 we have from the coastal communities. That will take some time and highway, as we are still getting refugees from areas that were destroyed by high winds.
>
> The State and Federal workers with the aid stations, hot kitchens, supplies, clothing and equipment need the roadways to be as clear as possible so they can perform their tasks. There are 6,000 State/Federal workers staging out of San Antonio now to work the coast/Houston/outlying areas as needed.
>
> And it is still raining...
Actually in the west Houston area the sun has been out most of this
afternoon. We believe the rain event is over for the western Houston
area. This rain event is now being called an 800 year rain event. To
understand how much water has been dropped, 9 Trillion gallons that is
how much water goes over Niagra Falls in two weeks, would cover the
entire United States with just over 1/8" of water.
On 9/2/2017 1:20 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:53:15 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
>> On 9/2/2017 11:42 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>> On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrote:
>>>> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to be
>>>>>> around for weeks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhood, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartments are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment finder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit.
>>>>>
>>>>> FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they were considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighborhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeting, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't really have a direction for another several months.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I
>>>> could be there to restore.
>>>> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
>>>> Much better than being away from the house.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in areas where
>>> many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spare house".
>>
>>
>> Not true
>>
>>>
>>> If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhoods are in
>>> areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to built/bought
>>> on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and poor) don't
>>> have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage.
>>
>> Actually the richest neighborhoods are along Buffalo bayou, the one that
>> is expected to be out of its banks for weeks on end. This was a non
>> discriminatory flood.
>>
>> It is true that the vast majority do not have flood insurance, only 1 in
>> 6 have it. I absolutely feel sorry for the poor that do not have flood
>> insurance, not so much for the rich that do not have flood insurance. I
>> will always have it regardless of my elevation. I could be 100' feet
>> higher than my close neighborhoods and if debris blocks storm drains I
>> might flood before they do. This actually happened about 10 years ago
>> when a tornado went through our and neighboring neighborhoods followed
>> by about 3" of hard rain. The lower neighborhoods drained quickly, our
>> neighborhood flooded and it normally took 10+" to flood.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time is probably
>>> a luxury few can afford.
>>>
>>
>> Absolutely
>
> Well, at least I got that last part right. ;-)
>
;~). It is hard to understand exactly what is going on down here by
watching the news.
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 7:22:10 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
> I didn't say anything about FEMA doing everything right after Katrina.
> FEMA is (federal) government. When they do something right, it's time
> to be amazed.
>=20
> >But the other five trailers they used did not leak.
>=20
> Let's all hope that FEMA learned something.
Kinna diverting from this school of thought, FEMA did learn something after=
Katrina. The trailers they supplied had issues with the China-made plywo=
od interiors, namely, the gassing off of formaldehyde. Lots of those trai=
lers were simply parked, unused. Later, some outfits tried to sell some o=
f them, after buying them thinking they could turn a quick profit off unkno=
wing buyers. If I'm not mistaken, there were still some parked at the old=
racetrack, here, just 2 yrs ago.
Another diversion from thought: Prospective subdivisions, here, have (had?=
) been havens for drug dealers (cul-de-sacs or otherwise), in that, the mai=
l boxes, of the empty homes, was where the transactions took place.... no o=
ne paid attention to them as exchange (money-drugs) venues. The subdivisi=
on, behind me, was one of those places where exchanges were made, via the m=
ailboxes. Several guys (brothers), living behind me, got caught.
Sonny
On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 16:01:58 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>yard while his home was being rebuilt. There are thousands of
>not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
>too. BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
>who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
>They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
>learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
Friend volunteered his skills in Katrina, he and the others were
housed in Fema trailers. One leaked as if the caulking was missing and
lo and behold it was.
But the other five trailers they used did not leak.
On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 17:55:46 -0500, Markem <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 16:01:58 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>yard while his home was being rebuilt. There are thousands of
>>not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
>>too. BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
>>who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
>>They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
>>learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
>
>Friend volunteered his skills in Katrina, he and the others were
>housed in Fema trailers. One leaked as if the caulking was missing and
>lo and behold it was.
I didn't say anything about FEMA doing everything right after Katrina.
FEMA is (federal) government. When they do something right, it's time
to be amazed.
>But the other five trailers they used did not leak.
Let's all hope that FEMA learned something.
On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>
>>>On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>>
>>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>>> question???
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>>recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>>
>>If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>>property, why would there be an issue?
>
>A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
>might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
>get a little tight-lipped about it.
>>
>>Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>your driveway?
>
>Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
I would not buy any property that was afflicted by an HOA. Of course
the town here thinks it's an HOA so I really need to look into moving.
[email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> >> >> ...
> >> >>
> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
> >> >> ...
> >> >>
> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
> >>
> >> I was.
> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
> >> trailer to his septic tank.
> >
> >...because he could afford to.
> >
> >>
> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
> >> head.
> >> >
> >
> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
> >
> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
> >the Houston area should just do it.
> >
> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
> >
> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
> yard while his home was being rebuilt. There are thousands of
> not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
> too. BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
> who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
> They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
> learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
Harvey last week, now Irma in "Beast Mode" w/185mph winds and the
spaghetti models leaning towards a Florida hit, FEMA will be tested
as never before. Let's hope they can handle back-to-back disasters.
http://www.ssd.noaa.gov/PS/TROP/floaters/11L/imagery/rb_lalo-animated.gif
https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/storminfo/11L_gefs_latest.png
On 8/28/17 7:47 PM, Leon wrote:
> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>
> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> just about an hour ago.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>
> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>
> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>
> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
> changing.
>
> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>
> Leon
>
Good to hear you are ok!
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 8/29/17 5:45 AM, Dr. Deb wrote:
>
> Leon, glad to hear you are okay. As you said, so many are not.
>
> Its at times like this we realize just how much we actually need each other.
>
Interesting you say that.
This is an article about a family from my church.
Check out her quote near the end of the article. :-)
<http://www.wsmv.com/story/36236331/franklin-family-visiting-texas-faces-difficult-decision-on-whether-to-leave>
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 29/08/2017 10:47 @wiz, Leon wrote:
> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>
> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
Glad to read you all are safe.
Been worried sick about a few cyberfriends I have in Houston.
What a dangerous time for all!
On 8/30/2017 1:23 PM, Leon wrote:
>
> I has not rained in the Houston are in the past 24 hours. In our
> immediate area it is almost like it did not happen.
> Streets in adjacent neighborhoods, south of the Barker reservoir are
> seeing the water empty from their streets quickly.
>
> We are 1 mile south of the reservoir.
>
> This morning I walked up to and over the reservoir and down the other
> side. It is still flooded but, thank GOD, the water is receding. I
> went there to specifically look for a high water mark. And fortunately
> it was there indicating that the high point has been reached, probably
> 3~4 feet from spilling over the spillway. The limit is 104.4', I think
> it crested at around 110.5'
>
> And this picture, taken this morning, looks great compared to thousands
> of other places in the Houston area.
> This is the top of the Barker Reservoir on the SW end of the
> levee/spillway at Peek Road, for those that are familiar.
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36113047373/in/dateposted-public/
>
> This is the shallow end of the reservoir it goes about 5~8 miles east
> and north from here and only gets deeper.
>
What amazes me is how little water is around after 5 FEET of rain. If
Pgh got 5 feet of rain, everything not on a mountain top would be under
100 feet of water. We got 4 INCHES of rain in an hour once, and the
valley between my house and the next mountain got a 20 foot wall of
water that killed a bunch of people, including my uncle, when their
vehicles got washed away.
--
Jack
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.
http://jbstein.com
On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
> ...
>
>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>
> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
> question???
>
> --
>
>
>
I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
On 9/3/2017 1:05 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 03-Sep-17 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
> ...
>
> I've yet to hear anything from mom's side of the family down
> there...some scattered from Port Arthur to Baytown to Victoria and then
> another batch in The Valley mostly between Harlingen and McAllen/Pharr...
>
> I'm presuming having not heard means they're all at least not either
> dead or missing...when Mom's last sister down there passed, we've had
> little direct contact with the cousins and all their families.
>
> --
The "valley" may have not even gotten any rain, some 120 or so miles
south of where the eye went in.
On 9/3/2017 9:53 AM, dpb wrote:
> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> ...
>
>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move
>> into.
>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity,
>> all
>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
> ...
>
> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>
> It would be good to think it possible but I really doubt it's feasible
> -- and, of course, if it were, overnight those $4K trailers will be $10K
> or $15K...
>
> Some of the Houston crowd can update -- at one time 30 yr ago when was
> still consulting down there some for Shell Development, there was little
> zoning but code enforcement was fairly far along. I'm guessing they've
> added more reg's since.
>
> --
>
FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
On 9/3/2017 5:53 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 03-Sep-17 2:58 PM, Leon wrote:
>> On 9/3/2017 1:05 PM, dpb wrote:
>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>> I've yet to hear anything from mom's side of the family down
>>> there...some scattered from Port Arthur to Baytown to Victoria and
>>> then another batch in The Valley mostly between Harlingen and
>>> McAllen/Pharr...
>>>
>>> I'm presuming having not heard means they're all at least not either
>>> dead or missing...when Mom's last sister down there passed, we've had
>>> little direct contact with the cousins and all their families.
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> The "valley" may have not even gotten any rain, some 120 or so miles
>> south of where the eye went in.
>
> Yeah, I'm certain those in the valley aren't being affected by Harvey;
> the "northern branch", not so much -- they were pretty much in the
> middle of it. The aunts/uncles I did know fairly well and first cousins
> are pretty much gone; it's all their families left...
>
> I do remember back in 50s at one point grandparents were flooded where
> they were between McAllen and Pharr. They farmed, had citrus and small
> dairy. It's higher between there and the coast so only place for water
> to go was irrigation canals and they were totally flooded too, of
> course. Took over six months as I recall before all the ground was
> above water again--killed all the citrus trees and of course no crops
> were left and took another full year before had any production at all
> plus the 5+ yr to reestablish the groves. All in all, "not a good thing".
>
> --
>
That area had to deal with Hurricane Beulah in 1967, IIRC. I lived in
Corpus Christi and we were on the dirty side of that storm, we had
street flooding for two straight days.
BUT I wish the best for all of your relatives that got caught up in this
disaster.
There is still severe flooding a few miles from our home.
On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> ...
>
> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
> ...
>
> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>
I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
> It would be good to think it possible but I really doubt it's feasible
> -- and, of course, if it were, overnight those $4K trailers will be $10K
> or $15K...
>
> Some of the Houston crowd can update -- at one time 30 yr ago when was
> still consulting down there some for Shell Development, there was little
> zoning but code enforcement was fairly far along. I'm guessing they've
> added more reg's since.
>
> --
On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 10:29:26 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wro=
te:
> On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 12:48:24 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> >On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 3:08:05 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
> >> On 9/2/2017 1:20 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> >> > On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:53:15 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
> >> >> On 9/2/2017 11:42 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> >> >>> On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker w=
rote:
> >> >>>> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >> >>>>> On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
> >> >>>>> =20
> >> >>>>>> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect wa=
ter to be
> >> >>>>>> around for weeks.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighb=
orhood, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. The=
y are driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apa=
rtments are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartm=
ent finder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 mi=
nutes of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the =
unit.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as th=
ey were considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the n=
eighborhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a =
meeting, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't =
really have a direction for another several months.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Robert
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so=
I
> >> >>>> could be there to restore.
> >> >>>> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
> >> >>>> Much better than being away from the house.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --=20
> >> >>>> Jeff
> >> >>>
> >> >>> From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in are=
as where
> >> >>> many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spar=
e house".
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Not true
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhood=
s are in
> >> >>> areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to buil=
t/bought
> >> >>> on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and po=
or) don't
> >> >>> have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage.
> >> >>
> >> >> Actually the richest neighborhoods are along Buffalo bayou, the one=
that
> >> >> is expected to be out of its banks for weeks on end. This was a no=
n
> >> >> discriminatory flood.
> >> >>
> >> >> It is true that the vast majority do not have flood insurance, only=
1 in
> >> >> 6 have it. I absolutely feel sorry for the poor that do not have f=
lood
> >> >> insurance, not so much for the rich that do not have flood insuranc=
e. I
> >> >> will always have it regardless of my elevation. I could be 100' fe=
et
> >> >> higher than my close neighborhoods and if debris blocks storm drain=
s I
> >> >> might flood before they do. This actually happened about 10 years =
ago
> >> >> when a tornado went through our and neighboring neighborhoods follo=
wed
> >> >> by about 3" of hard rain. The lower neighborhoods drained quickly,=
our
> >> >> neighborhood flooded and it normally took 10+" to flood.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time i=
s probably
> >> >>> a luxury few can afford.
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> Absolutely
> >> >=20
> >> > Well, at least I got that last part right. ;-)
> >> >=20
> >>=20
> >> ;~). It is hard to understand exactly what is going on down here by=
=20
> >> watching the news.
> >
> >You know, it's not just watching it, but reading about also. If you=20
> >google something like this...
> >
> >are poorer sections of Houston more apt to flood
> >
> >...you'll get articles like the ones at the links below.
> >
> >It's not just the physical flooding, but the aftermath and the lack of
> >resources typically available to the poorer areas.=20
> >
> >In any case, the bottom line is what we all know is true: The vast major=
ity
> >of those impacted can't just run out, buy an RV and move back onto their
> >land. For those in the inner city or tiny border towns, that option is n=
ot
> >even close to being *on* the most unrealistic list of options one could =
come=20
> >up with.
> >
> >
> >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/houston-harvey-environmental-justice=
_us_59a41c90e4b06d67e3390993
> >
> >https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/08/a-catastrophe-for-houst=
ons-most-vulnerable-people/538155/
> Buying an old motor home or tailer would be a LOT cheaper than
> staying in a hotel for a few months. Lits available for under $6000.
> That's 2 months in a hotel/motel, and you have a kitchen to prepair
> food instead of having to "eat out".
> Lots of trailers for under $4000
Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.=
=20
I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all=
=20
up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
=20
Yep, lots of inner city lots/streets have room for a bunch of trailers *and=
*=20
the houses that are being rebuilt.=20
Sure sounds good on paper, especially for those who were barely getting by
before the disaster.
On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:45:16 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
=20
> > The problem is that everyone has a different definition of "eyesore"
> > and the definition charges dramatically over time. It's not just
> > "eyesore" that changes, either.
> >=20
>=20
> Well that is true but when you buy into a subdivision with a HOA "here"=
=20
> you agree to the terms or you cannot close on the house. So by=20
> initialing that you agree to the terms, you agree. If you have problems=
=20
> with that you have no one to blame but yourself.
>=20
> Not pointing the finger at you, just speaking figuratively.
In my opinion, Texas should have a "universal code" or some kind of promulg=
ated, recognized rule set for HOAs. Some here are tyrannical, and some are=
like toothless old dogs that can only bark.
I work in small developments that I charge the daylights out of for everyth=
ing because of the HOAs. If I repair a roof, I have to certify in writing =
that I searched to find the closest match shingle to the existing. So if O=
.C.'s Estate Gray is off by a shade or two, they can require the homeowner =
try another factory run. ALL paint colors for everything must be approved =
by an architectural committee. Same with landscaping, same with types of pl=
ants and grasses, sprinkler systems, types of trees (no nut trees), and on =
a on. No animal feeding;, no birds, squirrels, hummingbirds, or deer.
My dumpsters have to be graffiti free, and if graffiti appears over a weeke=
nd, I must replace the dumpster. As a rule, I don't use rusted or damaged =
dumpsters, but these guys require that I net the top of it every night and =
lock the door as well. I have to charge to haul siding to a place where it=
isn't viewable from the street from any angle. So even when siding is del=
ivered, we haul it to the back of the house and stack it, then haul it to t=
he front as needed. Even I am starting a siding job the moment the siding =
is delivered, I have it all hauled to the rear.
I cannot start work earlier than 9am, nor work later than 5pm. You don't ma=
ke money in construction working those hours, and if it is 4pm, and the nex=
t step could take two hours, you pack up and go home. Add the extra time t=
o the client's bill and start up the next day where you left off. The HOA =
vigilantes call the police if your truck is parked going against traffic. =
They call the police to alert them if your employees have a truck that has =
a ground clearance (14", I think).
They write HOA "citations" for excessive noise. No equipment can be left vi=
sible at the end of the day, period. A small loader or lift, nope. Scaffo=
lding must have a "permit" from the HOA that is approved by the architectur=
al committee for a certain amount of time.
Remodeling is almost impossible as they control every aspect of design, fin=
ish materials and even finish out materials. For their very lives, the HOAs=
can't figure out why contractors hate them. It isn't just the funny littl=
e man with the big paunch in his baggy shorts with his spindly white legs, =
his black socks in white dress shoes walking a chihuahua with his coolray b=
ifocals that snoops around on the job, interrupts your workers, reminds the=
m of rules they don't care about, and asks stupid questions.
It is because they can stop your job anytime, even if they don't know what =
you are doing. If you don't stop at any time when they want you to, they c=
an fine the homeowner (my client). They can take a homeowner to court anyt=
ime and force them to pay both sides of the legal teams.
That represents almost all of the HOAs that were started about 20 years ago=
to now. Older HOAs, they got nothing. They can make suggestions, but tha=
t's it. If there is a rule about one thing or another, they don't have the=
money to take anyone to court. Besides, the language of the HOA articles =
is so loose it simply says that "this or that isn't allowed". No indicatio=
n of penalty should that situation occur.
Can't say about Houston. They are screwy to begin with due to their lack o=
f zoning and bizarre building codes. It will, no doubt, be a challenge for=
my brother in law since he is the long standing president of their HOA.
Truthfully, I think there is so much devastation in Texas now that just get=
ting folks dry, safe and accounted for is the priority. One of the FEMA gu=
ys said on TV "this wasn't going to be another New Orleans". I think they =
mean it. Don't forget that the former mayor or New Orleans, the guy that O=
prah cried and hugged on TV many times, the guy that was lauded a such a gr=
eat humanitarian, a sensitive guy that put his people first... is still in =
prison for stealing just about every thing he could. In fact, he has just =
been called out of prison to be deposed on more corruption charges. His re=
lease date is at this point up for speculation.
Once again, we will see.
Robert
On 9/4/2017 7:50 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>> On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>>>>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>>>>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>>>>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>>>>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>>>>>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>>>>>>> question???
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>>>>>> recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>>>>>> property, why would there be an issue?
>>>>>
>>>>> A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
>>>>> might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
>>>>> get a little tight-lipped about it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>>>>> your driveway?
>>>>>
>>>>> Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
>>>>
>>>> I would not buy any property that was afflicted by an HOA. Of course
>>>> the town here thinks it's an HOA so I really need to look into moving.
>>>
>>> It's getting hard to buy without an HOA, anymore. Developers use them
>>> to protect themselves during build-out, then dump the mess on the
>>> homeowners. Ours may have gotten the message that we're not
>>> interested (haven't heard from them since the last annual meeting but
>>> this year's is next Saturday).
>>>
>> In the Houston area the HOA takes over where the local governments leave
>> off. Our HOA pays for landscape crews to keep up with the common areas
>> and the entrances. The HOA pays for maintenance around the neighborhood
>> and pays for street lighting, mosquito control, etc.
>
> The only common areas we have are the two entrances to the subdivision
> (~70 homes). The HOA plants annuals around the signs and mows around
> them (big deal). I'd prefer they plant perennials and ditch the
> signs. They serve no purpose, now that the subdivision is completely
> build. They also bought an unbuildable lot off the last developer
> (the first went bust in '08) for some unknown reason. It would make a
> lousy park or whatever. It's at the edge of the development and would
> only serve as a place for kids to drink (and whatever). That's what
> the cul-de-sacs were before the subdivision was built out.
Down here and I suspect there too, the developers are board members on
the HOA. Until the subdivision is actually built out the developer's
remains on the board. Purchasing the unbuildable lot from the developer
"down here" would mean that the HOA would be able to elect it's own home
owner board members and do what is best for the HOA vs what is best for
the developer. Our neighborhood is about 12 years old but the HOA was
not controlled by the home oners until about 6 years ago.
>>
>> I actually prefer to be in a strict HOA, you can not buy in a
>> neighborhood with knowing and agreeing to the rules and regulations.
>> Our HOA is not terrible to deal with....I'm the president. ;~) But we
>> do want residents to pay their dues and to not be the eye sore on the
>> street.
>
> The problem is that everyone has a different definition of "eyesore"
> and the definition charges dramatically over time. It's not just
> "eyesore" that changes, either.
>
Well that is true but when you buy into a subdivision with a HOA "here"
you agree to the terms or you cannot close on the house. So by
initialing that you agree to the terms, you agree. If you have problems
with that you have no one to blame but yourself.
Not pointing the finger at you, just speaking figuratively.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>>>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>>>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>>>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>>>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>>>>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>>>>>> question???
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>>>>> recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>>>>> property, why would there be an issue?
>>>>
>>>> A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
>>>> might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
>>>> get a little tight-lipped about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>>>> your driveway?
>>>>
>>>> Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
>>>
>>> I would not buy any property that was afflicted by an HOA. Of course
>>> the town here thinks it's an HOA so I really need to look into moving.
>>
>> It's getting hard to buy without an HOA, anymore. Developers use them
>> to protect themselves during build-out, then dump the mess on the
>> homeowners. Ours may have gotten the message that we're not
>> interested (haven't heard from them since the last annual meeting but
>> this year's is next Saturday).
>>
>In the Houston area the HOA takes over where the local governments leave
>off. Our HOA pays for landscape crews to keep up with the common areas
>and the entrances. The HOA pays for maintenance around the neighborhood
>and pays for street lighting, mosquito control, etc.
>
>I actually prefer to be in a strict HOA, you can not buy in a
>neighborhood with knowing and agreeing to the rules and regulations.
>Our HOA is not terrible to deal with....I'm the president. ;~)
Why am I not surprised?
> But we
>do want residents to pay their dues and to not be the eye sore on the
>street.
On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:11:00 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I was.
>>>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>> >> head.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>> >
>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>
>>>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>for all.
>>>
>>>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>>>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>>>regard for the folks here.
>>
>>(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
>>Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
>
>Isn't that where the tradesmen park and where supplies for the rebuild
>are delivered?
That's what the _yard_ is for. And the tradesmen park in the street.
> It probably wouldn't be a good idea to constantly be
>in their way. Perhaps you like someone living in the middle of your
>workspace, though.
If you're in their way then start the damned thing up and drive off.
You clearly don't grasp the conept of "RV".
>>(2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
>>be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
>>responsibility to rebuild it).
>
>Duh! That was my point. Genius!
No, your point was something about people who have houses but are too
poor to obtain an RV.
For people who don't have houses to begin with, rebuilding is not an
issue.
DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Ventilation could be an issue. You need windows, fans, heaters, etc. Heck, FEMA
> > > got screwed on trailers that were designed to be lived in. Imagine all the issues with
> > > housing people in converted shipping containers. The lawyers are already salivating.
> > >
> > > Besides, the gathering of the containers and beds, the cleaning, the welding,
> > > the set-up etc. all take the "instant" part out of the equation.
> >
> > PODS®
> >
> > https://www.pods.com/container-sizes
> > http://us.exaude.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/pods-3.jpg
> > https://tours.360wichita.com/3868/slideshow10307/delivery.jpg
>
> Nice pictures.
>
> Is there a reason that you posted them?
The point being, humans are resilient. Some of us are old enough to
remember back when there was no FEMA. I had family members (cousins)
that lost everything but survived hurricane Camille back in '69, they
woulda' thought they "were shittin' in high cotton" if the Govt had
delivered a 16ft POD as temp housing as opposed to being crammed in a
school several miles away.
"Ventilation could be an issue" - Roll the door upward.
"You need windows" - Roll the door upward.
"fans" - - Roll the door upward.
"heaters" - Roll the door downward.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>>>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>>>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>>>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>>>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>>>>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>>>>>> question???
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>>>>> recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>>>>> property, why would there be an issue?
>>>>
>>>> A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
>>>> might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
>>>> get a little tight-lipped about it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>>>> your driveway?
>>>>
>>>> Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
>>>
>>> I would not buy any property that was afflicted by an HOA. Of course
>>> the town here thinks it's an HOA so I really need to look into moving.
>>
>> It's getting hard to buy without an HOA, anymore. Developers use them
>> to protect themselves during build-out, then dump the mess on the
>> homeowners. Ours may have gotten the message that we're not
>> interested (haven't heard from them since the last annual meeting but
>> this year's is next Saturday).
>>
>In the Houston area the HOA takes over where the local governments leave
>off. Our HOA pays for landscape crews to keep up with the common areas
>and the entrances. The HOA pays for maintenance around the neighborhood
>and pays for street lighting, mosquito control, etc.
The only common areas we have are the two entrances to the subdivision
(~70 homes). The HOA plants annuals around the signs and mows around
them (big deal). I'd prefer they plant perennials and ditch the
signs. They serve no purpose, now that the subdivision is completely
build. They also bought an unbuildable lot off the last developer
(the first went bust in '08) for some unknown reason. It would make a
lousy park or whatever. It's at the edge of the development and would
only serve as a place for kids to drink (and whatever). That's what
the cul-de-sacs were before the subdivision was built out.
>
>I actually prefer to be in a strict HOA, you can not buy in a
>neighborhood with knowing and agreeing to the rules and regulations.
>Our HOA is not terrible to deal with....I'm the president. ;~) But we
>do want residents to pay their dues and to not be the eye sore on the
>street.
The problem is that everyone has a different definition of "eyesore"
and the definition charges dramatically over time. It's not just
"eyesore" that changes, either.
On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 12:48:24 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 3:08:05 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
>> On 9/2/2017 1:20 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> > On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:53:15 PM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
>> >> On 9/2/2017 11:42 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>> >>> On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrote:
>> >>>> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> >>>>> On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to be
>> >>>>>> around for weeks.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhood, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartments are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment finder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they were considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighborhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeting, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't really have a direction for another several months.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Robert
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I
>> >>>> could be there to restore.
>> >>>> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
>> >>>> Much better than being away from the house.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Jeff
>> >>>
>> >>> From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in areas where
>> >>> many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spare house".
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Not true
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhoods are in
>> >>> areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to built/bought
>> >>> on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and poor) don't
>> >>> have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage.
>> >>
>> >> Actually the richest neighborhoods are along Buffalo bayou, the one that
>> >> is expected to be out of its banks for weeks on end. This was a non
>> >> discriminatory flood.
>> >>
>> >> It is true that the vast majority do not have flood insurance, only 1 in
>> >> 6 have it. I absolutely feel sorry for the poor that do not have flood
>> >> insurance, not so much for the rich that do not have flood insurance. I
>> >> will always have it regardless of my elevation. I could be 100' feet
>> >> higher than my close neighborhoods and if debris blocks storm drains I
>> >> might flood before they do. This actually happened about 10 years ago
>> >> when a tornado went through our and neighboring neighborhoods followed
>> >> by about 3" of hard rain. The lower neighborhoods drained quickly, our
>> >> neighborhood flooded and it normally took 10+" to flood.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time is probably
>> >>> a luxury few can afford.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Absolutely
>> >
>> > Well, at least I got that last part right. ;-)
>> >
>>
>> ;~). It is hard to understand exactly what is going on down here by
>> watching the news.
>
>You know, it's not just watching it, but reading about also. If you
>google something like this...
>
>are poorer sections of Houston more apt to flood
>
>...you'll get articles like the ones at the links below.
>
>It's not just the physical flooding, but the aftermath and the lack of
>resources typically available to the poorer areas.
>
>In any case, the bottom line is what we all know is true: The vast majority
>of those impacted can't just run out, buy an RV and move back onto their
>land. For those in the inner city or tiny border towns, that option is not
>even close to being *on* the most unrealistic list of options one could come
>up with.
>
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/houston-harvey-environmental-justice_us_59a41c90e4b06d67e3390993
>
>https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/08/a-catastrophe-for-houstons-most-vulnerable-people/538155/
Buying an old motor home or tailer would be a LOT cheaper than
staying in a hotel for a few months. Lits available for under $6000.
That's 2 months in a hotel/motel, and you have a kitchen to prepair
food instead of having to "eat out".
Lots of trailers for under $4000
On 9/7/2017 9:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 09:44:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>> On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was.
>>>>>>> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>
>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>
>>>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>> for all.
>>>
>>> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
>>> to rebuild the house either.
>>>
>>> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>>
>> Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
>
> If they are renting then why do they need to rebuild the house? It
> isn't _their_ house.
>
UHhhh they have to live some where. you idiot. You must be one of the
most miserable persons I have ever been exposed to.
On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>> >> >> ...
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>> >> >> ...
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I was.
>>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>> >
>>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>> >> head.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >
>>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>> >
>>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>>> >
>>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>> >
>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>
>>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>for all.
>>
>>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>>regard for the folks here.
>
>(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
>Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
Isn't that where the tradesmen park and where supplies for the rebuild
are delivered? It probably wouldn't be a good idea to constantly be
in their way. Perhaps you like someone living in the middle of your
workspace, though.
>(2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
>be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
>responsibility to rebuild it).
Duh! That was my point. Genius!
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 15:31:03 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>>DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4,
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay
>>>> for a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you
>>>> could load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.
>>>
>>> Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading
>>> equipment can be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation
>>> step to the set-up process.
>>
>>Right, but 2-3 semis with a pair of containers each could probably have
>>10-20 containers set up in a day.
>
>Have you ever been _in_ a container? 20' by 6' is what, about 120 square
>feet? No Windows, door hardware only on the exterior. No plumbing,
>No electricity.
Yeah, just sleep in the street. 120ft^2 isn't enough shelter. It's
*insulting*.
[email protected] writes:
>On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 15:31:03 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>wrote:
>
>>Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>>>DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4,
>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay
>>>>> for a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you
>>>>> could load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading
>>>> equipment can be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation
>>>> step to the set-up process.
>>>
>>>Right, but 2-3 semis with a pair of containers each could probably have
>>>10-20 containers set up in a day.
>>
>>Have you ever been _in_ a container? 20' by 6' is what, about 120 square
>>feet? No Windows, door hardware only on the exterior. No plumbing,
>>No electricity.
>
>Yeah, just sleep in the street.
Where, above, was that stated? You wouldn't be perceived as such a
jerk if you would stop with the strawmen.
> 120ft^2 isn't enough shelter. It's
>*insulting*.
I note that you don't have a problem with no plumbing or ventilation
in the deep south in late summer.
On 9/6/2017 8:32 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/6/2017 12:12 AM, Markem wrote:
>> On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> (2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
>>> be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
>>> responsibility to rebuild it).
>>
>> Actually some landlords are expecting rent from tenants in Houston
>> apartments that are flood damaged and not livable.
>>
>
> They still have a mortgage to pay. From what I red, the tenant can
> notify the landlord in writing if the apartment in not in livable
> condition and void the lease. While is seems sleazy, it may be legal
> thing so they can collect insurance. It would be sleazy to actually
> collect the rent though.
You do not have to won property to qualify for housing assistance from FEMA.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 20:17:05 -0700 (PDT), Sonny <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 7:22:10 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> I didn't say anything about FEMA doing everything right after Katrina.
>> FEMA is (federal) government. When they do something right, it's time
>> to be amazed.
>>
>> >But the other five trailers they used did not leak.
>>
>> Let's all hope that FEMA learned something.
>
>Kinna diverting from this school of thought, FEMA did learn something after Katrina. The trailers they supplied had issues with the China-made plywood interiors, namely, the gassing off of formaldehyde. Lots of those trailers were simply parked, unused. Later, some outfits tried to sell some of them, after buying them thinking they could turn a quick profit off unknowing buyers. If I'm not mistaken, there were still some parked at the old racetrack, here, just 2 yrs ago.
We'll see if they really learned anything. Would you have suspected
that formaldehyde might be bad for people? It wasn't unknown in
plywood and particle board, at the time.
>Another diversion from thought: Prospective subdivisions, here, have (had?) been havens for drug dealers (cul-de-sacs or otherwise), in that, the mail boxes, of the empty homes, was where the transactions took place.... no one paid attention to them as exchange (money-drugs) venues. The subdivision, behind me, was one of those places where exchanges were made, via the mailboxes. Several guys (brothers), living behind me, got caught.
Nice dark places, off the beaten path, attract all sorts of vermin.
On 9/6/2017 12:12 AM, Markem wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> (2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
>> be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
>> responsibility to rebuild it).
>
> Actually some landlords are expecting rent from tenants in Houston
> apartments that are flood damaged and not livable.
>
They still have a mortgage to pay. From what I red, the tenant can
notify the landlord in writing if the apartment in not in livable
condition and void the lease. While is seems sleazy, it may be legal
thing so they can collect insurance. It would be sleazy to actually
collect the rent though.
On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>> >> >> ...
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>> >> >> ...
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>> >>
>>> >> I was.
>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>> >
>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>> >> head.
>>> >> >
>>> >
>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>> >
>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>> >
>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>> >
>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>
>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>for all.
>
>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>regard for the folks here.
(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
(2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
responsibility to rebuild it).
>
>>> There are thousands of
>>> not-impoverished persons in Greater Houston who are without homes,
>>> too.
>>
>>Yep.
>>
>>
>>> BTW, that's exactly what FEMA does - move trailers in for those
>>> who have no other place to live, while the cleanup is in progress.
>>> They made a mess of it after Katrina but my bet is that they've
>>> learned a thing or three, since. Let's hope so.
>>
>>What do you mean a mess? Everything seems perfectly normal to me. ;-)
>
>Good point, though normal = mess when the federal government gets
>involved.
>
>>"Part of the problem was that FEMA was projected to spend $239,000 for each
>>280-square-foot trailer at one site through March 2009 as much as a buying
>>a five-bedroom, 2,000-square-foot home in Jackson, Miss., according to GAO."
>>
>>http://www.whas11.com/ext/news/nation-now/fema-emergency-housing-for-hurricane-harvey-refugees-will-be-frustrating-and-a-long-proces/417/nationnow/3dtXJhc1mMI4OaE0ikOiwO
>
>It's government. Even bottomless pockets will be picked.
On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>(2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
>be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
>responsibility to rebuild it).
Actually some landlords are expecting rent from tenants in Houston
apartments that are flood damaged and not livable.
On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 09:44:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was.
>>>>>> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>
>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>
>>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>> for all.
>>
>> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
>> to rebuild the house either.
>>
>> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>
>Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
If they are renting then why do they need to rebuild the house? It
isn't _their_ house.
On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
...
> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
...
None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
It would be good to think it possible but I really doubt it's feasible
-- and, of course, if it were, overnight those $4K trailers will be $10K
or $15K...
Some of the Houston crowd can update -- at one time 30 yr ago when was
still consulting down there some for Shell Development, there was little
zoning but code enforcement was fairly far along. I'm guessing they've
added more reg's since.
--
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> LOL. I always went to the meetings and one day the HOA VP visited me
> and indicated that the secretary resigned. He asked if I would be
> willing to fill that spot, I accepted. FF about a year and the board
> made me president. I keep getting reelected with no opposition and
> reassigned to hold the president position.
Leadership is sometimes a position they give you to keep you from causing
trouble. You weren't causing trouble for them, were you Leon? ;-)
Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!
On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 22:19:27 -0400, J. Clarke
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 22:11:00 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 22:45:54 -0400, J. Clarke
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:25:51 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> >> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> >On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> > Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>> >> >> > I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>> >> >> > up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>> >> >> ...
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>> >> >> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>> >> >> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>> >> >> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> >I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>> >> >solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> I was.
>>>>>> >> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>> >> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>> >> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>> >> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >...because he could afford to.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>> >> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>> >> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>> >> head.
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>> >housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>> >sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>> >the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>> >but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>
>>>>>My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>for all.
>>>>
>>>>They have no back yard to park one in if they had the $4000. I don't
>>>>believe the last sentence is true at all. I guess I have a higher
>>>>regard for the folks here.
>>>
>>>(1) who said anything about "back yard", and why a yard at all?
>>>Haven't you people ever seen a driveway?
>>
>>Isn't that where the tradesmen park and where supplies for the rebuild
>>are delivered?
>
>That's what the _yard_ is for. And the tradesmen park in the street.
Do you block your driveway when contractors show up? I sure don't.
>> It probably wouldn't be a good idea to constantly be
>>in their way. Perhaps you like someone living in the middle of your
>>workspace, though.
>
>If you're in their way then start the damned thing up and drive off.
>You clearly don't grasp the conept of "RV".
"RV" can also be a trailer. I don't imagine you could buy much of a
class-A motor home for $4000.
>
>>>(2) If they don't own property then what the Hell are they supposed to
>>>be rebuilding? (hint, if your apartment is destroyed, is isn't _your_
>>>responsibility to rebuild it).
>>
>>Duh! That was my point. Genius!
>
>No, your point was something about people who have houses but are too
>poor to obtain an RV.
No, that certainly was *not* my point. I never said anything of the
kind.
>For people who don't have houses to begin with, rebuilding is not an
>issue.
Except that they have nowhere to live.
On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 10:24:07 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
> >...
> >
> >> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
> >> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
> >
> >And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
> >as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
>
> I think the idea is that these intermodal containers could be shipped
> where they're needed using existing infrastructure and *stored* until
> needed. The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
> first time around.
Where would you store them? Considering we now know where they are needed, where
would you have stored them prior to Harvey and Irma.
Would enough containers have been delivered to Barbuda prior to Irma? The Keys? The
coastal areas around Houston - e.g. the small towns and villages, etc.?
Do you load up California in anticipation of the Big One? If so, where? Everywhere?
How do you determine where the next disaster will strike? How do keep them ready for use
when they may sit fior decades?
>
> >There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
> >shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
> >repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
> >they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
>
> For permanent homes, no, I don't think anyone is proposing that
> they're a good idea.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
>...
>
>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>
>And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
>as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
>
>There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
>shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
>repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
>they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
Geez, pick at nits much?
Whether you start with a container as a framework or whether you start
from scratch and build a habitation that can be handled using standard
container-handling equipment, you end up in the same place, and
whining about how it can't be done is just obstructionism.
DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> Where would you store them? Considering we now know where they are
> needed, where would you have stored them prior to Harvey and Irma.
>
> Would enough containers have been delivered to Barbuda prior to Irma?
> The Keys? The coastal areas around Houston - e.g. the small towns and
> villages, etc.?
>
> Do you load up California in anticipation of the Big One? If so,
> where? Everywhere?
>
> How do you determine where the next disaster will strike? How do keep
> them ready for use when they may sit fior decades?
>
You'd want them to be stored within easy distance of rail lines, because
on land railroads are the way to move them efficiently. I'd probably
scatter them about: a small pile in Chicago, a small pile in Cheyenne, a
small pile in Kansas City. Maybe about a train's or two's worth. That
way, when disaster hits the trains can all originate at different points
and hopefully won't disrupt too much traffic on the railroads.
Some prestaging may be useful, but you'd probably be better off loading
the trains as the storm is hitting rather than trying to prestage and
finding the forecast was wrong.
Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!
On 9/13/2017 5:25 AM, William Ahern wrote:
>>
>>> There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
>>> shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
>>> repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
>>> they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
>>
>> For permanent homes, no, I don't think anyone is proposing that
>> they're a good idea.
>
> Many architects seem enamored of them. Here's an interesting point (among
> many) made by an architect pushing back against the fad:
>
> An empty 40' shipping container weighs 8380 pounds. A galvanized steel
> stud weighs a pound per linear foot. These two containers, melted down and
> rolled and formed, could have been upcycled into 2,095 8' long steel
> studs. Framing the walls instead of using shipping containers would have
> used about 144 of them. Using shipping containers as structural elements
> for a one storey building is downcycling and wasting of a resource.
According to this guy the container can be better used making 2095
studs. What is the total impact once those studs are made into walls
with drywall, nails, energy for recycling, etc.? Doubt he did the right
research before commenting
On 9/13/2017 6:41 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 10:24:07 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
>>>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>>>
>>> And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
>>> as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
>>
>> I think the idea is that these intermodal containers could be shipped
>> where they're needed using existing infrastructure and *stored* until
>> needed. The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
>> first time around.
>
> Where would you store them? Considering we now know where they are needed, where
> would you have stored them prior to Harvey and Irma.
>
> Would enough containers have been delivered to Barbuda prior to Irma? The Keys? The
> coastal areas around Houston - e.g. the small towns and villages, etc.?
>
> Do you load up California in anticipation of the Big One? If so, where? Everywhere?
>
> How do you determine where the next disaster will strike? How do keep them ready for use
> when they may sit fior decades?
>
>
It can have benefits. They can be stored in much less space than a FEMA
trailer since containers stack well. You can transport 12,000 of them
on a single ship. Of course, then you need the supporting
infrastructure to handle the ship, the loading/unloading and the
tractors to move them to final location. Trains can move them too, but
you still need the right equipment on the rails.
It is not a single solution to all housing needs but I can see it as a
benefit is some areas. Just one piece of a well planed pie.
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
>...
>
>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>
>And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
>as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
I think the idea is that these intermodal containers could be shipped
where they're needed using existing infrastructure and *stored* until
needed. The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
first time around.
>There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
>shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
>repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
>they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
For permanent homes, no, I don't think anyone is proposing that
they're a good idea.
[email protected] wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:17:48 -0500, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On 12-Sep-17 6:23 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
>>...
>>
>>> Don't focus so tightly on the container as it is. Look at it as it could
>>> be: Windows, doors, plumbing, electricity can ALL be installed. ...
>>
>>And by the time you do that w/ a box not intended for the purpose might
>>as well just have a purpose-built prefab -- oh, FEMA already did that.
>
> I think the idea is that these intermodal containers could be shipped
> where they're needed using existing infrastructure and *stored* until
> needed. The FEMA trailers made during Katrina weren't much good the
> first time around.
>
>>There's an outfit around here using them as the basis for tornado
>>shelters and folks use them all over as storage and occasionally
>>repurpose for small barns, etc., and yes, rarely for dwelling space but
>>they're simply not particularly well-suited for the purpose at hand.
>
> For permanent homes, no, I don't think anyone is proposing that
> they're a good idea.
Many architects seem enamored of them. Here's an interesting point (among
many) made by an architect pushing back against the fad:
An empty 40' shipping container weighs 8380 pounds. A galvanized steel
stud weighs a pound per linear foot. These two containers, melted down and
rolled and formed, could have been upcycled into 2,095 8' long steel
studs. Framing the walls instead of using shipping containers would have
used about 144 of them. Using shipping containers as structural elements
for a one storey building is downcycling and wasting of a resource.
Later on he says
Don't get me wrong; I love shipping container architecture that moves,
plugs in, that takes advantage of the tremendous infrastructure. I agree
with Mark that it is terrific for temporary or emergency uses. But does it
make good housing? I don't think so. Perhaps after all these years I am
still missing something.
Source https://www.treehugger.com/sustainable-product-design/whats-wrong-shipping-container-housing-one-architect-says-everything.html
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 16:36:39 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>>On Mon, 11 Sep 2017 15:31:03 GMT, [email protected] (Scott Lurndal)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Puckdropper <puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>>>>DerbyDad03 <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>>news:[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, September 9, 2017 at 10:15:52 PM UTC-4,
>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One thing I've wondered about... Couldn't a reasonable place to stay
>>>>>> for a family be built in a 20' container? They're stackable, so you
>>>>>> could load a stack train up and unload in an empty parking lot.
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming the parking lot is right by the tracks and that the unloading
>>>>> equipment can be set up/used on-site. If not, add a transportation
>>>>> step to the set-up process.
>>>>
>>>>Right, but 2-3 semis with a pair of containers each could probably have
>>>>10-20 containers set up in a day.
>>>
>>>Have you ever been _in_ a container? 20' by 6' is what, about 120 square
>>>feet? No Windows, door hardware only on the exterior. No plumbing,
>>>No electricity.
>>
>>Yeah, just sleep in the street.
>
> Where, above, was that stated? You wouldn't be perceived as such a
>jerk if you would stop with the strawmen.
It's emergency shelter, jackass. It's not supposed to have all the
comforts of home.
>
>
>> 120ft^2 isn't enough shelter. It's
>>*insulting*.
>
> I note that you don't have a problem with no plumbing or ventilation
>in the deep south in late summer.
>
Plumbing can be taken care of in other units. Ventilation can be
done. You really are a jackass.
On 9/5/2017 3:24 PM, Puckdropper wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>>
>> LOL. I always went to the meetings and one day the HOA VP visited me
>> and indicated that the secretary resigned. He asked if I would be
>> willing to fill that spot, I accepted. FF about a year and the board
>> made me president. I keep getting reelected with no opposition and
>> reassigned to hold the president position.
>
> Leadership is sometimes a position they give you to keep you from causing
> trouble. You weren't causing trouble for them, were you Leon? ;-)
>
> Puckdropper
>
LOL, I may have been a trouble maker way back. I was awarded management
position of an automotive tire center for Ameron Automotive Centers in
1975, I was 21.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 22:45:03 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>On 9/4/2017 7:50 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>>>>>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>>>>>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>>>>>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>>>>>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>>>>>>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>>>>>>>> question???
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>>>>>>> recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>>>>>>> property, why would there be an issue?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
>>>>>> might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
>>>>>> get a little tight-lipped about it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>>>>>> your driveway?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
>>>>>
>>>>> I would not buy any property that was afflicted by an HOA. Of course
>>>>> the town here thinks it's an HOA so I really need to look into moving.
>>>>
>>>> It's getting hard to buy without an HOA, anymore. Developers use them
>>>> to protect themselves during build-out, then dump the mess on the
>>>> homeowners. Ours may have gotten the message that we're not
>>>> interested (haven't heard from them since the last annual meeting but
>>>> this year's is next Saturday).
>>>>
>>> In the Houston area the HOA takes over where the local governments leave
>>> off. Our HOA pays for landscape crews to keep up with the common areas
>>> and the entrances. The HOA pays for maintenance around the neighborhood
>>> and pays for street lighting, mosquito control, etc.
>>
>> The only common areas we have are the two entrances to the subdivision
>> (~70 homes). The HOA plants annuals around the signs and mows around
>> them (big deal). I'd prefer they plant perennials and ditch the
>> signs. They serve no purpose, now that the subdivision is completely
>> build. They also bought an unbuildable lot off the last developer
>> (the first went bust in '08) for some unknown reason. It would make a
>> lousy park or whatever. It's at the edge of the development and would
>> only serve as a place for kids to drink (and whatever). That's what
>> the cul-de-sacs were before the subdivision was built out.
>
>Down here and I suspect there too, the developers are board members on
>the HOA. Until the subdivision is actually built out the developer's
>remains on the board.
Yes, and has veto power over the board. That's why I said that HOAs
are designed to protect the builder during build-out. He couldn't
care what happens after.
>Purchasing the unbuildable lot from the developer
>"down here" would mean that the HOA would be able to elect it's own home
>owner board members and do what is best for the HOA vs what is best for
>the developer.
It's just one lot (and the last one). The builder has ultimate
control until he sells the last house.
>Our neighborhood is about 12 years old but the HOA was
>not controlled by the home oners until about 6 years ago.
About half the subdivision was built in 2006 and 2007. Wen the fit
hit the shan in 2008, the builder went bust (with some foundations
started) and the other half of the lots reverted back to the bank. A
new builder bought the property from the bank in 2014 and finished the
subdivision in 2015 and 2016 (finishing the houses on those 8YO
foundations). The HOA bought the unbuildable lot in 2016, IIRC, just
as the last of the homes were selling. Note that the builder(s), nor
the bank paid any HOA fees.
>>> I actually prefer to be in a strict HOA, you can not buy in a
>>> neighborhood with knowing and agreeing to the rules and regulations.
>>> Our HOA is not terrible to deal with....I'm the president. ;~) But we
>>> do want residents to pay their dues and to not be the eye sore on the
>>> street.
>>
>> The problem is that everyone has a different definition of "eyesore"
>> and the definition charges dramatically over time. It's not just
>> "eyesore" that changes, either.
>>
>
>Well that is true but when you buy into a subdivision with a HOA "here"
>you agree to the terms or you cannot close on the house. So by
>initialing that you agree to the terms, you agree. If you have problems
>with that you have no one to blame but yourself.
The fact is that the rules *can* change after the game begins.
>Not pointing the finger at you, just speaking figuratively.
Understand. I don't know if being appointed to an HOA board makes
people crazy or if it's only the crazy people who sit on HOA boards.
Not pointing a finger at you, just speaking figuratively. ;-)
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:31:43 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>On 9/7/2017 9:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 09:44:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was.
>>>>>>>> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>
>>>>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>> for all.
>>>>
>>>> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
>>>> to rebuild the house either.
>>>>
>>>> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>>>
>>> Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
>>
>> If they are renting then why do they need to rebuild the house? It
>> isn't _their_ house.
>>
>
>
>UHhhh they have to live some where. you idiot. You must be one of the
>most miserable persons I have ever been exposed to.
Yes, they do. But they are not going to be rebuilding anything, they
are going to be looking for another place to rent.
That you don't grasp this and find it appropiate to call other people
stupid when they don't just agree with you says that you are both
immature and insecure.
And once again I am bored with your bullshit so back into the killfile
you go.
On 9/5/2017 12:30 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 22:45:03 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>> On 9/4/2017 7:50 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, J. Clarke
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 14:56:55 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9/3/2017 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
>>>>>>>>>>> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
>>>>>>>>>>> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
>>>>>>>>>>> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
>>>>>>>>>>> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
>>>>>>>>>> trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
>>>>>>>>>> question???
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I do not know the rules, I'm sure it depends on the location. BUT I
>>>>>>>>> recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If it's designed to be a house trailer or RV and if it's on your
>>>>>>>> property, why would there be an issue?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A house trailer would be an issue just about anywhere but a RV trailer
>>>>>>> might be different. OTOH, if you're living in it, the gendarmes might
>>>>>>> get a little tight-lipped about it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Are you suggesting that in Houston it's illegal to park your RV in
>>>>>>>> your driveway?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not allowed here (dumbass HOA).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would not buy any property that was afflicted by an HOA. Of course
>>>>>> the town here thinks it's an HOA so I really need to look into moving.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's getting hard to buy without an HOA, anymore. Developers use them
>>>>> to protect themselves during build-out, then dump the mess on the
>>>>> homeowners. Ours may have gotten the message that we're not
>>>>> interested (haven't heard from them since the last annual meeting but
>>>>> this year's is next Saturday).
>>>>>
>>>> In the Houston area the HOA takes over where the local governments leave
>>>> off. Our HOA pays for landscape crews to keep up with the common areas
>>>> and the entrances. The HOA pays for maintenance around the neighborhood
>>>> and pays for street lighting, mosquito control, etc.
>>>
>>> The only common areas we have are the two entrances to the subdivision
>>> (~70 homes). The HOA plants annuals around the signs and mows around
>>> them (big deal). I'd prefer they plant perennials and ditch the
>>> signs. They serve no purpose, now that the subdivision is completely
>>> build. They also bought an unbuildable lot off the last developer
>>> (the first went bust in '08) for some unknown reason. It would make a
>>> lousy park or whatever. It's at the edge of the development and would
>>> only serve as a place for kids to drink (and whatever). That's what
>>> the cul-de-sacs were before the subdivision was built out.
>>
>> Down here and I suspect there too, the developers are board members on
>> the HOA. Until the subdivision is actually built out the developer's
>> remains on the board.
>
> Yes, and has veto power over the board. That's why I said that HOAs
> are designed to protect the builder during build-out. He couldn't
> care what happens after.
>
>> Purchasing the unbuildable lot from the developer
>> "down here" would mean that the HOA would be able to elect it's own home
>> owner board members and do what is best for the HOA vs what is best for
>> the developer.
>
> It's just one lot (and the last one). The builder has ultimate
> control until he sells the last house.
>
>> Our neighborhood is about 12 years old but the HOA was
>> not controlled by the home oners until about 6 years ago.
>
> About half the subdivision was built in 2006 and 2007. Wen the fit
> hit the shan in 2008, the builder went bust (with some foundations
> started) and the other half of the lots reverted back to the bank. A
> new builder bought the property from the bank in 2014 and finished the
> subdivision in 2015 and 2016 (finishing the houses on those 8YO
> foundations). The HOA bought the unbuildable lot in 2016, IIRC, just
> as the last of the homes were selling. Note that the builder(s), nor
> the bank paid any HOA fees.
>
>>>> I actually prefer to be in a strict HOA, you can not buy in a
>>>> neighborhood with knowing and agreeing to the rules and regulations.
>>>> Our HOA is not terrible to deal with....I'm the president. ;~) But we
>>>> do want residents to pay their dues and to not be the eye sore on the
>>>> street.
>>>
>>> The problem is that everyone has a different definition of "eyesore"
>>> and the definition charges dramatically over time. It's not just
>>> "eyesore" that changes, either.
>>>
>>
>> Well that is true but when you buy into a subdivision with a HOA "here"
>> you agree to the terms or you cannot close on the house. So by
>> initialing that you agree to the terms, you agree. If you have problems
>> with that you have no one to blame but yourself.
>
> The fact is that the rules *can* change after the game begins.
>
>> Not pointing the finger at you, just speaking figuratively.
>
> Understand. I don't know if being appointed to an HOA board makes
> people crazy or if it's only the crazy people who sit on HOA boards.
>
> Not pointing a finger at you, just speaking figuratively. ;-)
>
LOL. I always went to the meetings and one day the HOA VP visited me
and indicated that the secretary resigned. He asked if I would be
willing to fill that spot, I accepted. FF about a year and the board
made me president. I keep getting reelected with no opposition and
reassigned to hold the president position.
On 9/8/17 10:26 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:31:43 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>> On 9/7/2017 9:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 09:44:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for you to move into.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer, electricity, all
>>>>>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this stressful time.
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps trailering to your
>>>>>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it on the lot
>>>>>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common sense that
>>>>>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code enforcement.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was.
>>>>>>>>> When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly what he did.
>>>>>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the new house
>>>>>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent from the
>>>>>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be something
>>>>>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2 million
>>>>>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as temporary
>>>>>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those that make it
>>>>>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced person in
>>>>>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be a hardship,
>>>>>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his back
>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard becasue they
>>>>>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's the solution
>>>>>> for all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
>>>>> to rebuild the house either.
>>>>>
>>>>> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
>>>
>>> If they are renting then why do they need to rebuild the house? It
>>> isn't _their_ house.
>>>
>>
>>
>> UHhhh they have to live some where. you idiot. You must be one of the
>> most miserable persons I have ever been exposed to.
>
> Yes, they do. But they are not going to be rebuilding anything, they
> are going to be looking for another place to rent.
>
> That you don't grasp this and find it appropiate to call other people
> stupid when they don't just agree with you says that you are both
> immature and insecure.
>
> And once again I am bored with your bullshit so back into the killfile
> you go.
>
Grow the fu@k up.
You were being argumentative, judgemental, and very unsympathetic.
Killfile.... pffft. What grade are you in?
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
www.mikedrums.com
On 9/8/2017 10:31 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 9/8/17 10:26 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 13:31:43 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/7/2017 9:19 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 6 Sep 2017 09:44:10 -0500, Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/5/2017 9:43 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4,
>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4,
>>>>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 at 10:54:05 AM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 02-Sep-17 10:37 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, $4000 grand and it's sitting on your lot, ready for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you to move into.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess they come with delivery. Water's hook up, sewer,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> electricity, all
>>>>>>>>>>>>> up to whatever lenient code the city allows during this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> stressful time.
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> None of the above will be in the $4K except perhaps
>>>>>>>>>>>> trailering to your
>>>>>>>>>>>> location. It's not likely the city will allow one to put it
>>>>>>>>>>>> on the lot
>>>>>>>>>>>> even in these circumstances, though, altho it makes common
>>>>>>>>>>>> sense that
>>>>>>>>>>>> rarely has any place in government, particularly in code
>>>>>>>>>>>> enforcement.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I assume you realize that that was a sarcastic response to
>>>>>>>>>>> Clare's $4K housing
>>>>>>>>>>> solution. I sure wasn't being serious.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Â Â Â I was.
>>>>>>>>>> Â Â Â When my kid broyher's house burned down that's excatly
>>>>>>>>>> what he did.
>>>>>>>>>> He picked up an old RV and parked it in his yard untill the
>>>>>>>>>> new house
>>>>>>>>>> was built. Her used a camping sewer cart to take the effluent
>>>>>>>>>> from the
>>>>>>>>>> trailer to his septic tank.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...because he could afford to.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Â Â Â Stoll lots of cheap RVs for sale in Florida - might not be
>>>>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>>>>> you want to park in a fancy trailrt park beside some guy's 2
>>>>>>>>>> million
>>>>>>>>>> dollar rig - but it's dry, warm, and enclosed, with a kitchen and
>>>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ...if you can afford to buy one, transport it, hook it up, etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have no argument with the practicality of using a trailer as
>>>>>>>>> temporary
>>>>>>>>> housing. My only issue, right from the start, is with those
>>>>>>>>> that make it
>>>>>>>>> sound like it's so cheap (and practical) that every displaced
>>>>>>>>> person in
>>>>>>>>> the Houston area should just do it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There's theory, then there's real life. $4K for you may not be
>>>>>>>>> a hardship,
>>>>>>>>> but $4K for a impoverished person might as well be $4MM.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OTOH, an "impoverished person" wouldn't be parking an RV in his
>>>>>>>> back
>>>>>>>> yard while his home was being rebuilt.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My point exactly. They wouldn't be parking an RV in their yard
>>>>>>> becasue they
>>>>>>> can't afford it. Some folks around here make it sound like it's
>>>>>>> the solution
>>>>>>> for all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey, if they can afford a minimal RV then they probably can't afford
>>>>>> to rebuild the house either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How did they manage to pay for it to begin with?
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe they are renting. Renters get FEMA compensation.
>>>>
>>>> If they are renting then why do they need to rebuild the house? It
>>>> isn't _their_ house.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> UHhhh they have to live some where. you idiot. You must be one of the
>>> most miserable persons I have ever been exposed to.
>>
>> Yes, they do. But they are not going to be rebuilding anything, they
>> are going to be looking for another place to rent.
>>
>> That you don't grasp this and find it appropiate to call other people
>> stupid when they don't just agree with you says that you are both
>> immature and insecure.
>>
>> And once again I am bored with your bullshit so back into the killfile
>> you go.
>>
>
> Grow the fu@k up.
> You were being argumentative, judgemental, and very unsympathetic.
> Killfile.... pffft.  What grade are you in?
>
>
He is in the Turd grade
On 03-Sep-17 12:13 PM, Leon wrote:
...
> FEMA is paying for hotels for those flooded out of their homes. $4K
> would be way too much for a big percentage of families to pay.
> FEMA provided trailers for flood victims during the aftermath of Allison
> 16 years ago, thousands of trailers. And yes the city allowed the
> trailers to be situated near the affected homes.
But would they let a homeowner put one on the lot itself and a private
trailer rather than FEMA in one of the designated locations is the
question???
--
On 03-Sep-17 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
...
I've yet to hear anything from mom's side of the family down
there...some scattered from Port Arthur to Baytown to Victoria and then
another batch in The Valley mostly between Harlingen and McAllen/Pharr...
I'm presuming having not heard means they're all at least not either
dead or missing...when Mom's last sister down there passed, we've had
little direct contact with the cousins and all their families.
--
On 03-Sep-17 2:58 PM, Leon wrote:
> On 9/3/2017 1:05 PM, dpb wrote:
>> On 03-Sep-17 12:57 PM, dpb wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> I've yet to hear anything from mom's side of the family down
>> there...some scattered from Port Arthur to Baytown to Victoria and
>> then another batch in The Valley mostly between Harlingen and
>> McAllen/Pharr...
>>
>> I'm presuming having not heard means they're all at least not either
>> dead or missing...when Mom's last sister down there passed, we've had
>> little direct contact with the cousins and all their families.
>>
>> --
>
> The "valley" may have not even gotten any rain, some 120 or so miles
> south of where the eye went in.
Yeah, I'm certain those in the valley aren't being affected by Harvey;
the "northern branch", not so much -- they were pretty much in the
middle of it. The aunts/uncles I did know fairly well and first cousins
are pretty much gone; it's all their families left...
I do remember back in 50s at one point grandparents were flooded where
they were between McAllen and Pharr. They farmed, had citrus and small
dairy. It's higher between there and the coast so only place for water
to go was irrigation canals and they were totally flooded too, of
course. Took over six months as I recall before all the ground was
above water again--killed all the citrus trees and of course no crops
were left and took another full year before had any production at all
plus the 5+ yr to reestablish the groves. All in all, "not a good thing".
--
On 01-Sep-17 10:25 AM, Jack wrote:
...
> What amazes me is how little water is around after 5 FEET of rain. If
> Pgh got 5 feet of rain, everything not on a mountain top would be under
> 100 feet of water. We got 4 INCHES of rain in an hour once, and the
> valley between my house and the next mountain got a 20 foot wall of
> water that killed a bunch of people, including my uncle, when their
> vehicles got washed away.
Terrain makes all the difference, indeed--we were in Lynchburg, VA, when
Camille dumped 24-30+" in 8 hours overnight in 1969 in the heart of
Nelson County in the Blue Ridge Mountains. It killed some 150-160,
liquified and washed away whole small mountains and massively changed
the landscape...but, because it's all mountainous, when the surge
passed, except in the bottoms there was virtually no standing water,
just mud and debris.
Most horrible experience of my life doing recovery work in the aftermath...
--
On 9/1/2017 3:31 PM, dpb wrote:
> On 01-Sep-17 10:25 AM, Jack wrote:
> ...
>
>> What amazes me is how little water is around after 5 FEET of rain. If
>> Pgh got 5 feet of rain, everything not on a mountain top would be under
>> 100 feet of water. We got 4 INCHES of rain in an hour once, and the
>> valley between my house and the next mountain got a 20 foot wall of
>> water that killed a bunch of people, including my uncle, when their
>> vehicles got washed away.
>
> Terrain makes all the difference, indeed--we were in Lynchburg, VA, when
> Camille dumped 24-30+" in 8 hours overnight in 1969 in the heart of
> Nelson County in the Blue Ridge Mountains. It killed some 150-160,
> liquified and washed away whole small mountains and massively changed
> the landscape...but, because it's all mountainous, when the surge
> passed, except in the bottoms there was virtually no standing water,
> just mud and debris.
>
> Most horrible experience of my life doing recovery work in the aftermath...
For sure. My wife's uncle lived in a valley, the same valley where my
uncle drowned when his car washed away in a flash flood. The water
filled his basement, and 3 feet in his first floor. A chest of drawers
in his basement had all the drawers filled perfectly smooth to the top
with mud. All the electric outlets which looked fine, were packed
perfectly smooth with the mud when you took off the cover plates. His
yard had at least 2 feet of mud and debris covering his grass and
garden. It was a real mess, everything stunk to high heaven, and took an
incredible amount of work to get back to normal.
My uncle, who was 84 years old, had stopped to get gas. He lived on top
of a mountain, but was getting gas at the bottom of the valley. An eye
witness said he was pumping gas when suddenly the water started pouring
over the creek next to him. He jumped in his car to drive out of it,
and a huge wall of water washed him and his car 5 miles down the valley.
Took them 4 days to find him in his car, covered in mud and debris. All
from 4 lousy inches of rain.
--
Jack
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.
http://jbstein.com
On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 09:42:34 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrote:
>> On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>> > On Friday, September 1, 2017 at 12:20:42 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>> >
>> >> The link above is a shallow point. East of here they expect water to be
>> >> around for weeks.
>> >
>> > Got an email from my sister. Still no electricity in her neighborhood, but "all of the sudden", the water is receding in their house. They are driving around now, but mostly looking for other places to live. Apartments are lasting (literally) just several minutes when put on the apartment finder pages or on someone's facebook page. She responded within 15 minutes of a posting on a facebook page, and she was already aced out of the unit.
>> >
>> > FEMA assessors still haven't made it to their neighborhood as they were considered "moderate" flooding with only 4-7 feet of water in the neighborhood, and only 2' in their house. No word on when they will have a meeting, but she said the govt folks are pouring into the city.
>> >
>> > This is going to be a long, long process of recovery that won't really have a direction for another several months.
>> >
>> > Robert
>> >
>>
>> I would go up north and buy an RV, and put that on my property so I
>> could be there to restore.
>> The RV would then be a weekend user, or sell it.
>> Much better than being away from the house.
>>
>> --
>> Jeff
>
>From what I understand, many of the worst damage was done in areas where
>many of the people can't afford to rebuild, never mind buy a "spare house".
>
>If I extrapolated what I heard correctly, the poorest neighborhoods are in
>areas most likely to flood because those that could afford to built/bought
>on the higher ground. In addition, many of the people (rich and poor) don't
>have flood insurance (or enough insurance) to cover the damage.
>
>Being able to stay on your property and rebuild at the same time is probably
>a luxury few can afford.
I've got a tent for sale.
Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
> On 8/29/2017 9:15 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> > Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
> >
> >> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
> >> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
> >> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
> >>
> >> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
> >> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
> >> just about an hour ago.
> >>
> >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
> >>
> >> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
> >> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
> >> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
> >> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
> >>
> >> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
> >> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
> >> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
> >> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
> >> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
> >> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
> >>
> >> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
> >> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
> >> changing.
> >>
> >> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
> >> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
> >> and friends have dodged the bullet.
> >>
> >> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
> >> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
> >> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
> >>
> >> Leon
> >
> > It's good to hear you and your neighbors remain pretty much
> > unscathed! Looking back, do you think a mandatory evacuation should
> > have been issued by Houston's mayor before Harvey made landfall?
>
> Absolutely not. In 2005 just weeks after the Katrina disaster that hit
> New Orleans Houston was faced with hurricane Rita. Needless to say
> images of Katrina were still on all of us Hustonians minds. Evacuations
> might be ok if you have a few weeks to do so. A certain Dr. Neil Frank
> weather guy on TV indicated that this storm was going to be worst than
> Katrina and the Houston was going to be a direct target. Houston would
> be "devastated", get out NOW.
>
> IIRC some two million residents began evacuation 3 days before expected
> land fall. The highways were so over loaded that most people sat in a
> bumper to bumper parking lot that probably stretched 100 miles in some
> places. Vehicles ran out of gas on the highway while sitting 24-48
> hours waiting to get no where. Many people died in their vehicles as a
> result. Unnecessary deaths that today I point the finger at the good
> Dr. Yo do not flee winds. If you have time you flee rising water.
> We did not have time.
>
>
> >
> > I've not heard _anything_ on the news as to metro Houston's tap
> > water, is it safe to drink or bottled water only?
>
> With the exception of a very few cases the water is good. A couple of
> days before Harvey hit here our MUD president informed me that they had
> a back up generator for drinking water and one for the waste water plant.
Thank you, Leon and Robert for your detailed reply. Clearly, the
logistics of evacuating that many people in such a short period of
time would be imposable.
It's also clear reporters need to stop this crap with pushing a
microphone in the face of victims of this disaster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQnNohhMXNk
On 9/1/2017 4:33 PM, Sonny wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 12:23:24 PM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
>
>> This morning I walked up to and over the reservoir and down the other
>> side.
>
> You walked?
LOL, yeah, I walk a lot for health reasons.
>
>> And this picture, taken this morning,
>>
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36113047373/in/dateposted-public/
>
> That your Tundra ruts? Is that why you were walking? Kinna like at the farm, at times, when certain nephews are driving.
>
> Sonny
>
On 8/30/2017 10:13 AM, Casper wrote:
> Good to hear you and yours are safe and unflooded. Hope it stays that
> way and rain clears out soon.
>
> My neighbor left early yesterday morning to assist down there. He
> works with one of the organizations that provides support in areas
> requiring relief. Supposed to be there at least two weeks depending on
> need and supplies. I give him credit for jumping to anywhere in the
> world help is needed, although for his group, it's more frequently in
> the USA as of the last few years.
>
> We're all hoping to see a little less of this drastic stuff for a
> while. Been too much these last several years.
>
> Be well!
>
>> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
>> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
>> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>>
>> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
>> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
>> just about an hour ago.
>>
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>>
>> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
>> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
>> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
>> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>>
>> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
>> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
>> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
>> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
>> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
>> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>>
>> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
>> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
>> changing.
>>
>> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
>> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
>> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>>
>> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
>> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
>> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>>
>> Leon
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>
Thank you!
I has not rained in the Houston are in the past 24 hours. In our
immediate area it is almost like it did not happen.
Streets in adjacent neighborhoods, south of the Barker reservoir are
seeing the water empty from their streets quickly.
We are 1 mile south of the reservoir.
This morning I walked up to and over the reservoir and down the other
side. It is still flooded but, thank GOD, the water is receding. I
went there to specifically look for a high water mark. And fortunately
it was there indicating that the high point has been reached, probably
3~4 feet from spilling over the spillway. The limit is 104.4', I think
it crested at around 110.5'
And this picture, taken this morning, looks great compared to thousands
of other places in the Houston area.
This is the top of the Barker Reservoir on the SW end of the
levee/spillway at Peek Road, for those that are familiar.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36113047373/in/dateposted-public/
This is the shallow end of the reservoir it goes about 5~8 miles east
and north from here and only gets deeper.
On 8/30/2017 6:31 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>
>> On 8/29/2017 9:15 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
>>> Leon <lcb11211@swbelldotnet> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just touching in, we have been busy watching the news and hunkering
>>>> down. This has been an event. While this is nothing to take lightly
>>>> there are some of us that are doing just fine.
>>>>
>>>> I have personally emptied our rain gauge of 31.25" since Saturday
>>>> morning. This link shows my house and Tundra from a neighbors house
>>>> just about an hour ago.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb11211/36710124512/in/dateposted-public/
>>>>
>>>> So far we have no friends or relatives that have gotten any water in
>>>> their homes. There is a lot of luck involved in that but before
>>>> building our home I studied the flood plane maps before choosing a lot
>>>> and even then I chose a lot on the high point of the street.
>>>>
>>>> I just heard on NBC nightly news that we can expect 20+ more inches. I
>>>> seriously doubt that wee will get even close to half that. We have
>>>> received 6" since 10:00 last night and local forecasters expect this to
>>>> mostly be done by early tomorrow evening, at least in the immediate
>>>> Houston area. The areas you are mostly seeing on the news are the south
>>>> east side of Houston. That area got rain at a rate of 5" per hour.
>>>>
>>>> This is a tragic event for millions of Houstonians and it will take
>>>> years to recover. I have lived through events like this and it is life
>>>> changing.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, thank you to all that have called and texted, I appreciate your
>>>> concerns but this time around I believe my wife and I, our relatives,
>>>> and friends have dodged the bullet.
>>>>
>>>> A mile north of our neighborhood and a mile east of our neighborhood we
>>>> have been listening to air boats, yesterday and most all of today,
>>>> evacuating residents from their neighborhoods. This hit close.
>>>>
>>>> Leon
>>>
>>> It's good to hear you and your neighbors remain pretty much
>>> unscathed! Looking back, do you think a mandatory evacuation should
>>> have been issued by Houston's mayor before Harvey made landfall?
>>
>> Absolutely not. In 2005 just weeks after the Katrina disaster that hit
>> New Orleans Houston was faced with hurricane Rita. Needless to say
>> images of Katrina were still on all of us Hustonians minds. Evacuations
>> might be ok if you have a few weeks to do so. A certain Dr. Neil Frank
>> weather guy on TV indicated that this storm was going to be worst than
>> Katrina and the Houston was going to be a direct target. Houston would
>> be "devastated", get out NOW.
>>
>> IIRC some two million residents began evacuation 3 days before expected
>> land fall. The highways were so over loaded that most people sat in a
>> bumper to bumper parking lot that probably stretched 100 miles in some
>> places. Vehicles ran out of gas on the highway while sitting 24-48
>> hours waiting to get no where. Many people died in their vehicles as a
>> result. Unnecessary deaths that today I point the finger at the good
>> Dr. Yo do not flee winds. If you have time you flee rising water.
>> We did not have time.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I've not heard _anything_ on the news as to metro Houston's tap
>>> water, is it safe to drink or bottled water only?
>>
>> With the exception of a very few cases the water is good. A couple of
>> days before Harvey hit here our MUD president informed me that they had
>> a back up generator for drinking water and one for the waste water plant.
>
> Thank you, Leon and Robert for your detailed reply. Clearly, the
> logistics of evacuating that many people in such a short period of
> time would be imposable.
>
> It's also clear reporters need to stop this crap with pushing a
> microphone in the face of victims of this disaster.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQnNohhMXNk
>
A few reporters are doing a good job but most are just taking up space
on the boats and are of no help at all. This is an extremely bad time
for the people being evacuated and they don't need to be asked what they
think.