We can move back from the river, and build dams, and even diversions, but it's not really going to fix anything in the long run. The flood plain for the Red is simply too massive, exacerbated by the fact that it flows north, where melting flood waters in the south are constantly blocked by frozen areas in the north. The river also is shallow without a well defined valley, and has very little gradient to work with. A diversion or dams will help, but will eventually only move the problem downstream.
A north flowing diversion would have the same problems as a north flowing river. If a new river channel (diversion) is to be dug, wouldn't it make more sense to divert water south into the Minnesota River instead?
As for the houses, move back from the river use the river banks to create an extended wilderness area along the river to be used for recreation. Dams could be incorporated into a natural looking landscape.
I can't believe that with all the flooding, I still see new houses being built by the river. Come on people, its just common sense.
I had to edit this. I ended up having to use the word "dams" since the auto-censor wouldn't let me use the word d-i-k-e