Comments on: The Case Against Raising Your House

By: GentillyGirl

GentillyGirl — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 19:49:20 +0000

We’ve raised our house to 9+ feet, and we aren’t in the true “Flood zone”. If we take water in the house the “Sliver By the River” will have 3 feet of water.

As far as infrastructure goes, we’ll have the geo-thermal running and our solar system to keep the joint hopping. We also have a 5-stage RO that can keep the water from the taps clean. Damages to the cottages will be minimal as they are being redone in mold resistant materials.

The insurance B/S from a flood will be easier than the last Unpleasantness…

Understand, I can’t leave… this is the town where my people lived for centuries. This is one of the few places on Earth that I’m happy in, even if it was just a place of 5,000 inhabitants and two bars.

New Orleans will always be rebuilt. The Nation relies on us for so much of it’s operation. (If it wasn’t for the nut-job in the White House, things would have gone more smoothly after the Federal Flood.) Ultimately the city will be protected by a Dutch-style system.

BTW- I’ve decided to have a tough inflatable raft with an outboard just so’s we can zoom over to Gene’s and get a po’ boy if the water’s a little deep.

By: oyster

oyster — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 16:27:56 +0000

“Does anyone out there really think the city has a chance if another Katrina hits?”

Sure, the city has a great chance if “another Katrina” hits the Mississippi coast, assuming the rebuilt flood protection holds. Let’s “make the case” for raising the levees.

By: Craig

Craig — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 13:59:01 +0000

Well, I understand where you’re coming from. Anyone who chooses to build in or live in an area at or below the level of surrounding water needs to be completely aware of what they’re doing and take with a large box of Morton’s Iodized Salt the idea that government will “protect” them. After all, Mother Nature bats last.

But at the same time, I’ll take the odds of a disaster every 300 years (even a man-made one like the levee failure). Our track record here is a lot better than it’s been in, oh, South Florida and some other spots in hurricane-prone areas.

By: Mark Folse

Mark Folse — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:47:46 +0000

Entergy hasn’t backrupted themselves. They’re doing just fine, thanks. It’s only Entergy New Orleans, a shell company, that was bankrupt. The laws are written quite cleverly to make sure that the parent company, the one with actual stockholders, is insulated from any risk. That’s why government keeps the rates so low, to balance out the low ris. (snigger).

By: Mark Folse

Mark Folse — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 11:47:31 +0000

By: Please

Please — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 05:38:51 +0000

Also worth mentioning: The state of Pennsylvania also claimed all the properties in Centralia under eminent domain law. This would be next to impossible to do citywide in New Orleans in almost any given situation (the aftermath near-future hurricane, say), thanks to the law approved by voters in the wake of the Kelo v. New London backlash.

By: Please

Please — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 05:30:25 +0000

Congress appropriated some $42 million in the 1980s for relocation–to nearby towns–of Centralia residents. And that $42 million was for only a few hundred people. You’re not even taking into consideration the amount of money it would take to destroy existing properties, relocate essential businesses, help those relocated with job hunting (since they can’t easily be moved nearby, as in the Centralia case, without creating massive traffic problems and whatnot, which also cost serious amounts of money for new infrastructure and govt. services), etc., etc. You’d be better off just spending the money on sensible, but state-of-the-art flood control systems and wetlands restoration.

By: Chris Martel

Chris Martel — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:25:43 +0000

And Centralia PA has a population of 12 people. Sure it’s probable that New Orleans would retain a tiny fraction of its original population but that’s not really what I’m getting at. I’m sure real estate in Centralia is not booming.

By: Chris Martel

Chris Martel — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:20:44 +0000

I dunno. Sure, people can do what they want but at what point does government and commerce throw in the towel and say “we’re not rebuilding?” And who will live here if there’s no electricity, no services? I suppose if a generation goes by and this happens again, there’s a chance. If it happens again before we’re done rebuilding, there’s no chance.

By: Craig

Craig — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:09:42 +0000

Practicality has nothing to do with it. People still live in Centralia PA and on Montserrat. It’s a matter of time before San Francisco shakes and burns again. Name a place and I’ll name you a disaster of some sort.

Folks live where they feel they must — for whatever reasons. And sometimes they can’t define one — aside from Just Because.