The Army Corps should buy up as much of the land possible around the resouivor while the prices are depressed to prevent future development on it.
EDIT: My comment assumes that they would acquire additional funding to do this, as they are the best agency to acquire and hold the land to prevent future development (vs a traditional land trust for conservancy).
TFA says they bought 24,000 acres for about $170 / acre (today's dollars) in the 40s. The surrounding 8,000 acres in fact is perfectly buildable with the right codes in place.
"Stilting" houses is not a big deal, if flooding is to be expected. It's done all the time on the coast, and apparently should have been done here. The storm was once-in-a-lifetime, but there's no telling when the next one will hit.
"Communities that participate in the NFIP are required to adopt and enforce local regulations for development in mapped Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) to reduce the risk of flooding (see 44 CFR Parts 59 and 60)." If the zoning doesn't meet the minimum requirements, then NFIP is not available, which is a deal-breaker.
If the minimum requirements are not sufficient, they can be updated. If the area wasn't properly designated a SFHA, that should be fixed and all new construction and substantial renovation must conform.
This shit probably is not complicated, we just aren't versed in the field. I guessing that TFA fails in researching and educating the reader on the extensive regulations currently present.
>Long added that the Army Corps doesn’t have the power to control development on land the agency doesn’t own.
>“That would require the act of politicians, and they’ve chosen not to do it,” Long said.