We really need a revamping that discourages building on flood plains. Yes, harbors, docks, etc are required, but second homes, cities, and such are not. Why anyone goes to the expense of rebuilding on the same lot when they've had 4 ft of water in a living room is beyond me.
Last spring a news person was interviewing a retired couple. When they purchased their home they were told there had been no water there for 13 yrs, so they thought they were safe. HELLO?
Wake up people.
There should be some substantial effort to accurately define flood plains, but it should be buyer beware for those that want to buy and build. If they can afford private sector insurance that's fine, but Gov should not run agencies to bail everyone out and put them back into the same lot.
We repeatedly see folks in our closed basin move in, buy and build in the flood plain against everyone's advice, and then put everyone else at fault when the water shows up the third year. I'm sorry, but you were warned. The price for beach/lake front property can be very extreme in the long run.
Agreed, and the exact same logic should be applied to fire zones in the PRK as well.
