Godspeed to Houston and some urban policy questions about the flood

I like Houston. I always have. It is a hideous city, way too car-dependent, and has a climate designed to get me to hate it. But I have friends there and I like Texans. I really like Texans. Which is weird, when you think about it. I am from Brooklyn, and somebody just released a (sadly terrible, I can report) movie in which Texas quite literally invades Brooklyn.

Please help, either with your money or your time.

Remember, Texans are American, sometimes despite themselves. I have two very good friends in Houston and many others in greater Austin. One them told me, to my honest shock, that his kids have to say a pledge of allegiance to the State of Texas at school every day. Really, they do, although ironically that only dates back to 2003. Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible. Should I ever wind up moving to Houston (which I would do if my wife were not utterly opposed) I have to admit that I would insist that my children not say the Texas pledge. 

The U.S. is a republic worth allegiance. Any given state, not so much. Plus, America might be better off if Texas were split up. 

Self-referential intro over, there are two important policy questions about this storm.

The first, of course, is how much it is due to global warming. Right now, it appears as if the flooding has exceeded the 500-year-watermark. 

That implies the storm was unlikely. But it does not tell us how much less unlikely such storms have become as temperatures have risen. Heavy precipitation is up in the United States, but that is circumstantial evidence. What do climate scientists have to say?

The second is whether urban policies have contributed to the disaster. As Market Urbanism has pointed out, there is some very stupid commentary trying to link the disaster to Houston’s lack of zoning. That is dumb. Inasmuch as zoning has anything to do with anything, the lack thereof has allowed for taller structures to be built, which right now is saving lives and property.

But even though Houston is unzoned, American and Texan policies contribute to sprawl and the paving over of open space that might have otherwise absorbed rainfall. For example:

1. Minimum parking requirements;
2. State subsidies for roads and sewer hookups;
3. Property taxes that tax land values and structures at equal rates, discouraging intensive use of land.

And that in addition to the problem that floodplains are a classic example of a public good. Leaving the land open reduces the impact of floods on developed land, but the owner bears the cost while other property owners reap the benefits.

That said, what I do not know is how much policies have contributed to sprawl. Nor do I know how much sprawl has contributed to the damage from flooding. Sure, both have made the storm worse, but significantly worse? I do not know. But if such storms are becoming more common, then there is a lot riding on the answer to those questions.

Does anyone have any evidence?

But for now, while I wait for the internet to point me in the direction of answers (hah) Godspeed to the people of East Texas on their path through this storm. Again, please help, with money or time.

Comments

[Gabriel Mathy]

I'm not an expert but I think reducing the permeable area is the major determinant, right? So the exurban roads and houses are bad but the lawns not as much.

[Gabriel Mathy]

Houston needs a rain tax like Maryland had.

[Noel Maurer]

That is an excellent idea!

This ProPublica article isn't bad, but it connects Houston's lack of zoning to sprawl when such lack slows sprawl. The problem is that nobody internalizes the positive externality. Either you draw a growth boundary or you, as you suggest, impose a rain tax.

https://www.texastribune.org/boomtown-floodtown/