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, 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 Sat, 2 Sep 2017 09:42:34 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 12:01:56 PM UTC-4, woodchucker wrote:
On 9/1/2017 2:01 PM, 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.

On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 12:48:24 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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, 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/...b06d67e3390993

https://www.theatlantic.com/news/arc...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 Saturday, September 2, 2017 at 10:29:26 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sat, 2 Sep 2017 12:48:24 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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, 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/...b06d67e3390993

https://www.theatlantic.com/news/arc...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.
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.

Yep, lots of inner city lots/streets have room for a bunch of trailers *and*
the houses that are being rebuilt.

Sure sounds good on paper, especially for those who were barely getting by
before the disaster.

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.

--

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.Â* 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.Â* 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.Â* 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 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 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 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 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 Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, 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?

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 Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, 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?

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.

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, 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?

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 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 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
recall seeing the trailers everywhere, mostly in driveways.

I remember temporary exclusions being made from time to time.


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 more 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 of 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 house. Any of those things has to be parked on asphalt, concrete, or "otherwise improved" surfaces. The intent is that they don't want grandparents trailer hauled into the front yard (or backyard)of a subdivision and have it sink in the yard up to the axles.

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.

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 driving 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.

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 even party houses to watch sporting events. Pretty convenient; you have place to watch the event, a fridge for the beer, and even weatherproof conditions to do it in. Some of those trailer stayed in the driveways for YEARS, YEARS, 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 shortage. In the hundreds of briefings and updates that have followed in the last tend days, I did catch one where the FEMA guys responded about the trailer availability and use and he said they were proceeding quickly but carefully, adding that they had "learned a lot since Katrina".

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 have been in touch with my sister quite a bit and at last the water is out of her house. But they are still pretty much on their own, hauling out all their furniture and belongings by themselves. All the aid is still focused on relocating people, feeding them, and secondary searches of houses and debris, cleanup, etc..

Robert

On 9/4/2017 12:57 AM, 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 03-Sep-17 11:57 PM, 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 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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 Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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 Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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 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.Â* 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.Â* They farmed, had citrus and small
dairy.Â* 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.Â* 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.Â* 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 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 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, 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?

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 9/4/2017 8:06 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 9/4/2017 12:57 AM, 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.Â* We have a
limit on how long they can stay if they have dual axles.Â* We have
another ordinance that keep people from hooking up to electric, sewer
and water services for more than a few days.Â* 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.Â* 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.Â* Upon second thought, after the
allotted time how do you get them moved out?Â* 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 Mon, 04 Sep 2017 16:01:58 -0400, 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 Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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.

On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 17:55:46 -0500, Markem
wrote:

On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 16:01:58 -0400, 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 Mon, 4 Sep 2017 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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/natio...mMI4OaE0ikOiwO

It's government. Even bottomless pockets will be picked.

On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, 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?

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 Monday, September 4, 2017 at 7:22:10 PM UTC-5, 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.

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.

Sonny

On 9/4/2017 7:50 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, 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?

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 22:45:03 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 9/4/2017 7:50 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, 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?

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 Mon, 04 Sep 2017 20:21:59 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 17:55:46 -0500, Markem
wrote:

On Mon, 04 Sep 2017 16:01:58 -0400, 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.

wrote:

On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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/floa...o-animated.gif
https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/stor...efs_latest.png

On 9/5/2017 12:30 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 22:45:03 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 9/4/2017 7:50 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 17:03:51 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote:

On 9/3/2017 9:12 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:36:08 -0400, J. Clarke
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 21:06:41 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 03 Sep 2017 16:32:16 -0400, 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?

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.

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:


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 9/5/2017 3:24 PM, Puckdropper wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
:


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 16:46:01 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 4:02:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

On Monday, September 4, 2017 at 10:36:16 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 21:15:55 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
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/natio...mMI4OaE0ikOiwO
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.