Ike.....rebuild or not?

deadheadskier · Sep 19, 2008

This isn't the article, but an interesting one none the less.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/09/18/ike.last.house.standing/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

what are your thoughts/feelings of areas destroyed by storm surges that Hurricanes produce? rebuild or let it return to a natural state? As emotional as losing a home must be for people, I side with the latter. There are millions of acres of land more suitable for housing in this country, why people need to build a house on stilts on a beach is beyond me.

Marc · Sep 19, 2008

Lotta people calling a chop on that one.

As far as rebuilding... well... my answer would probably be a shade too political because it involves a caveat about federal relief via my tax dollars. I'll leave it at that.

deadheadskier · Sep 19, 2008

Marc said:
Lotta people calling a chop on that one.

As far as rebuilding... well... my answer would probably be a shade too political because it involves a caveat about federal relief via my tax dollars. I'll leave it at that.

I share the same money opinion.....ecology also weighs in on my stance

Moe Ghoul · Sep 19, 2008

Marc said:
Lotta people calling a chop on that one.

As far as rebuilding... well... my answer would probably be a shade too political because it involves a caveat about federal relief via my tax dollars. I'll leave it at that.

Well, considering that the "private" portion of the beach fronts have been washed away, that would put them on public land. If Galveston residents want to rebuild the land for a kazillion dollars so it can get washed away again, go ahead.

wa-loaf · Sep 19, 2008

Should be a one shot deal. Here's your relief money. If you rebuild on the beach, you are on your own next time.

Not comparing this to New Orleans, which is a whole 'nother set of issues.

Dr Skimeister · Sep 19, 2008

Has anyone seen data on what percentage of the destroyed homes were primary residences as opposed to secondary/vacation homes?

wa-loaf · Sep 19, 2008

These were mostly year rounders I believe:

dmc · Sep 19, 2008

I always heard that Long Beach Island in NJ was a whole lot different 100 years ago...
At various points there were inlets where there is now miniature golf. The ocean isn't really that containable...

I'm not really down with shore development - because i think it disrupts the natural flow of the sand...

I'm also not for bailing out rich folks after their houses get leveled in any way shape or form...

drjeff · Sep 19, 2008

Rebuild if you want on YOUR dime. Once the federal gov't has helped with the search and rescue and basic infastructure clean up/rebuild of PUBLIC assets, that should be it from the "Uncle Sam Bank and Trust Company" after that, The Uncle Sam bank should be closed

It's a pure risk thing, and if you choose to build in a low lying, hurricane prone area that is on or infront of a natural barrier island, then you should be prepared to deal with the risk. If that means that enjoying a meal with an ocean view involves you driving to the beach and bringing a picnic basket then so beit. But it shouldn't be the taxpayers responsibility to foot the bill.

Likewise, while I DON'T own property in a high hurricane risk area, or in a flood plane, IF say a tornado rolled through and obliterated my house, I wouldn't expect the federal gov't to come in and rebuild it for me. And in insuring me, my insurance company who is very happy to receive my policy payments quarterly, is the one I'd be looking to for the help.

bvibert · Sep 19, 2008

dmc said:
I'm also not for bailing out rich folks after their houses get leveled in any way shape or form...

This

I say to let them rebuild if they can afford it, otherwise pound sand.

dmc · Sep 19, 2008

bvibert said:
This

I say to let them rebuild if they can afford it, otherwise pound sand.

nice!

So how about that one house thats standing?

drjeff · Sep 19, 2008

dmc said:
nice!

So how about that one house thats standing?

Get the name of that builder and pass it around

Moe Ghoul · Sep 19, 2008

dmc said:
nice!

So how about that one house thats standing?

I heard that woman interviewed on the news. It's almost a cruel joke when you think about it.

GrilledSteezeSandwich · Sep 19, 2008

Moe Ghoul said:
I heard that woman interviewed on the news. It's almost a cruel joke when you think about it.

They don't have to worry about noisy neighbors..as for rebuilding or not..my opinion is that if the people want to rebuild they should be able to on their own dime..Wait until something like this hits the Jersey shore..since all the beachfront homes are multimillion $$$

dmc · Sep 19, 2008

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:
They don't have to worry about noisy neighbors..

Until the rebuilding starts...

dmc · Sep 19, 2008

Moe Ghoul said:
I heard that woman interviewed on the news. It's almost a cruel joke when you think about it.

http://news.aol.com/article/how-did...e/180724?icid=100214839x1209531221x1200578413

Hudspeth uploaded a photo of the home taken in May that silenced the skeptics. She explained that her sister and her sister’s husband, Pam and Warren Adams, rebuilt the home in 2006 after it had been destroyed by Hurricane Rita in 2005.
Hudspeth said they hired a contractor to build a structure that could withstand a Category 5 hurricane and watched over the process to assure it was done right.
The couple did evacuate before the storm and planned to return on Thursday to survey the damage.

wa-loaf · Sep 19, 2008

dmc said:
nice!

So how about that one house thats standing?

Word is they lost their house in the last hurricane and had that one built to withstand a cat 5.

deadheadskier · Sep 19, 2008

bvibert said:
This

I say to let them rebuild if they can afford it, otherwise pound sand.

In theory I agree, but it gets complicated. What if someone else comes in and can afford to build? Do you allow it only to have that house possibly get destroyed again? If someone elects not to rebuild, should the lot be left vacant?

I just see an area like that where the risks are well known and think, give it back to mother nature, she obviously wants it.

I feel the same way about many environmentally sensitive areas. Like a few years ago when all those mansions in California slid down the hill with a mudslide. Probably shouldn't have been built in the first place.

bvibert · Sep 19, 2008

deadheadskier said:
In theory I agree, but it gets complicated. What if someone else comes in and can afford to build? Do you allow it only to have that house possibly get destroyed again? If someone elects not to rebuild, should the lot be left vacant?

I just see an area like that where the risks are well known and think, give it back to mother nature, she obviously wants it.

I feel the same way about many environmentally sensitive areas. Like a few years ago when all those mansions in California slid down the hill with a mudslide. Probably shouldn't have been built in the first place.

I hear what you're saying and tend to agree. The problem is there's always going to be rich idiots who think they're above mother nature. Who are we to say they can't build there if they want? I say let them piss away their money building houses that are just going to get washed away, as long as we aren't the ones footing the bill for their foolishness.

riverc0il · Sep 20, 2008

drjeff said:
It's a pure risk thing, and if you choose to build in a low lying, hurricane prone area that is on or infront of a natural barrier island, then you should be prepared to deal with the risk. If that means that enjoying a meal with an ocean view involves you driving to the beach and bringing a picnic basket then so beit. But it shouldn't be the taxpayers responsibility to foot the bill.

Completely agree. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If people with a lot of money want to invest in expensive shore line development, fine. If they want to rebuild after a devastating natural disaster only too likely to reoccur in their lifetime, fine. It puts people to work and puts the wealth's money into the economy. But don't you dare get all teary eyed and say the government owes you one red cent. There will always be a demand for shore development even in high risk locations. Either get really good insurance (if you can even get coverage in the really prone areas?) or suck up the consequences. I never feel bad for people that set themselves up for disaster especially when they had other alternatives but rolled the dice and lost. I don't have the finances to play that way. If I played that way, no one would be bailing my butt out, that's for sure.

Ike.....rebuild or not?

Moderator

New member

Moderator

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Moderator

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Moderator

Moderator

New member