patrick.net

There is a theory that the past few years of more active hurricane seasons is actually marking the return to normal weather patterns there.

If that's the case I wonder how many years of consecutive rebuilding it'll take for people to finally say "You know, I don't think I want to live here anymore." Frankly I'm amazed that people are still living there.

I'll take the odd earthquake every 20 years or so. Actually the Sac region doesn't seem to get hit with quakes like the rest of the state, so far at least. *looking furiously for some wood to knock*

What is your definition of a “desirable area?” Do environmental/natural disasters impact your thinking when you look for a place to live? Where do you think your “happy home” will be found?''

Back on topic for a moment, I'd say that overall climate/quality of the local environment (clean air, water, having greenery, open space, having a not-insane commute to work, truly "affordable" housing, etc.) will have a big impact on where my wife and I end up buying. The overall level of education and openness to secularism/reason will also have a big impact (there's no way I could live anywhere deep in the Bible Belt). CA has this of course, but the hypocritical NIMBY & anti-development bias, high population density --particluarly from ever-growing masses of poor illegal immigrants (sorry if this offends some, but it DOES impact the overall quality of life here) and high levels of pollution all combine to make CA less than desirable in my book.

As far as natural disasters go, I wouldn't say this would be a prime consideration, because as Kent says, you can never completely eliminate all risk, but of course I wouldn't buy/build on a floodplain, earthquake faultline, avalanche zone, or any place built on rubble and sand (just had to get one last dig in at MP ;-) ). No matter where you live, you pretty much have to pick your poison and do your best to mitigate the local risks.

Where will I find my Shangri-La? Don't know, but the Pacific NW has always had a powerful draw, as it meets all the big desireables that I'm looking for. New Zealand would be extremely nice, but I understand their immigration laws make it almost impossible to go there. (Wow, a country that actually ENFORCES its immigration laws, what a concept!).

It is not really that hard to immigrate to New Zealand. The main requirement is that you have to have either a job offer or skills in a subject that they feel like they are in short supply, be relatively young, be in good health and speak English fluently.

You get points for all those things and you have to get 100 points total. You can also qualify by investing $2M NZ or starting a business in New Zealand.

For example: If you are a 40 year old with a BS in Computer Science and 10+ years experience in a tech field, you have 115 points and you can apply. Apparently, they take from the top, so it would help if you had a job offer before you went. Then you would have 165 points. If you had spent a year there already on a work visa, you would then actually be at 180. And so forth.

It is not just IT people that are in short supply, so are pretty much all medical jobs, Carpenter, college teacher and social worker.

Can you tell that I have already researched this? :-)

Oh, the other way to immigrate to New Zealand is to start a business that employs five people or to invest $2M NZ for at least five years. But I can't quality for that, so I didn't investigate it too much.

I just remember it being highly publicized that the multi-million dollar homes falling down the hill were uninsured.

Information regarding SactoQT's statement: tinyurl.com/bf5k7

From that article, per Pete Moraga, communications specialist for the Insurance Information Network of California....

"Moraga said that the landslide is not really an insurance issue because the standard homeowners policy does not cover land movement and landslide insurance is virtually nonexistent in California.

"The coverage that is available is very expensive. Traditionally it carries a 2 and a half percent deductible and is not available in areas that have a prior history of landslide. I doubt that any of these homeowners think that they have coverage for landslides because the policies are very specific. They typically exclude any type of land movement, whether it's a landslide, mudslide or an earthquake. Because Laguna has an extensive history of landslide, chances are that most of these homes wouldn't have any coverage," he added.

The same area is said to have suffered from a similar landslide in October 1978, when 24 families lost their homes. All but about six rebuilt there, the Times reported. Moraga said that there have been more landslides since that time."

So it is QUITE interesting that people can hear/read about the history of these areas, information has been disclosed to them before purchasing, yet will buy/build there anyway...for millions of dollars.

Go figure....

BayQT~

Jimbo,

Thanks for all the info on immigrating to NZ. The wife & I are going there soon, so maybe we'll check it out.

As I see it, this will give justification to push up oil near 80/barrel, driving gas over $3/gal and forcing the cash crunch to severely impact the marketplace. Thus a return to sound economic fundamentals will have to be reinstituted and enforced.

I have been thinking for awhile that it isn't going to take higher interest rates to drive down home prices, but that the oil prices were going to end up doing the job as they drive up the costs on most consumer goods. With this hurricane it looks like a sure bet that gas will go even higher and push prices up that much faster.

"Back after Andrew hit Florida, some companies just started pulling up stakes and saying, “forget it. We won’t insure anybody who lives in hurricane alley.” The government stepped in to preserve property values, because, you are right."

A bit infuriating isn't it?

In sacramento they are currently building out huge developments on flood-plains that were underwater a mere 20 years ago.

Cheers,
prat

I know we're nowhere near done with this thread, but after I read statements made by David Lereah in the LA Times today, I just couldn't help myself: "Is David Lereah going to Hell?"

Everyone, please keep posting on both --I think this one's great and still has plenty of room to grow.

Harm, I think you will be happy in Portland and surrounding areas. I've been doing a lot of reading about that section of the Pacific NW and I think that area aptly described the perfect place for you. The only thing ... can you do rain? Lots of rain? That is the question...

What is your definition of a “desirable area?” Do environmental/natural disasters impact your thinking when you look for a place to live? Where do you think your “happy home” will be found?

I've always considered the environment/natural setting an important part of life, even with inherent risks. Living on the coast, and a short distance from Mt Rainier, we had hazards from sea-borne storms tearing out 50 ft. alder trees. Meanwhile, we were never sure of our local volcano, and whether its majestic backdrop held ominous overtones for our community. And, only recently they've discovered housing tracts were built directly over lahar flows (volcanic mudflow), prompting towns make evacuation contingencies.
Personally, I think whether you choose to live on the gulf coast or in the mountains, you have to accept the risks of nature with the benefits. Natural beauty seems borne from cataclysmic events, whether it's glaciers, fault action, or volcanic eruptions. I'm willing to accept both sides of the equation, but within reason. I'll live amongst nature any day--while prepared for a few risks--than slowly become like a neatly clipped shrub in a planned suburban community.

The only thing … can you do rain? Lots of rain? That is the question…

Karrie, I agree - I think I'd love it too.
I lived in Atlanta for 2 years, which has almost identical average rainfall as Portland. One July it rained every day almost without letup --a whole month without seeing the sun-- np. Besides, I love rain (my friends think I'm kind of weird that way). Love the way it cleans and freshens the air and makes everything lush & green. Now, only problem is I need a job there...

@Karrie, HARM:

I looked long and hard into the Portland area.. I don't mind the rain, but I'll tell ya that the PacNW is not like other rainy places I've been. You can't measure it directly in accumulation..

The NWS says Portland has 137 sunny days/yr...Atlanta has 219. Portland actually has less rain than Atlanta -- 38" vs. Atlanta's 50". Portlanders claim that they want people to keep believing the weaher myths and stay away. I'm afraid they're true!

I was in SF for La Niña, 1997/98...that's the closest I can compare Portland to: always chilly, usually overcast, and frequently raining. Still, I was ready to move there a few months ago. I decided to head toward hurricane country instead, but I feel kind of relieved to avoid the greyness.

New Orleans was a candidate too. I thought about the dangers and disregarded them -- the city has been standing for 300 years, what is the likelihood that disaster will strike as soon as I arrive? (Same logic for my move to SF ten years ago...) And there's sooo many really fantastic buildings there.. But the city has lots of problems and almost no economy, so I abandoned that idea. Everything I'm reading about Katrina looks like the worst of NOLA's nightmares...my thoughts are with them tonight.

"C'mon sunshine, baby". - Katrina & The Waves.

I hope that will be funny tomorrow.

All in all though, I don't think environmental events like this affect climatic desireability.

Some people will be scared off, for sure, but others will take their place. People will avoid specific properties due to specific problems (we looked at a house in Berkeley, a half mile from the fault line, that seemed to be clinging for dear life to the side of the hill. My wife overruled my sense of adventure).

Earthquakes haven't kept people out of the Bay Area. I know people in New England who wouldn't ever move here, and I know people here who would never move to New England. (They have BLIZZARDS there?!?!). Cf hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanoes, tsunami, floods, etc. People are adaptable, though the folks in Pompeii might have (had) different thoughts (however briefly).

...with all that said, though...

I don't think an increasingly volatile climate will be good for the economy. If there's serious damage in NOLA tomorrow, it could be catastrophic for the region and for insurance companies. That part of the country is very very poor. A half million poor, displaced people would be difficult to absorb. There were 9 deaths and up to $2B of property damage from the Cat1 Katrina last week. We've been talking about trigger events, tipping points, etc. I hope for everyone's sake that Katrina isn't one.

I don’t think an increasingly volatile climate will be good for the economy. If there’s serious damage in NOLA tomorrow, it could be catastrophic for the region and for insurance companies...We’ve been talking about trigger events, tipping points, etc. I hope for everyone’s sake that Katrina isn’t one.

quesera,
Oil futures have already moved above $70/barrel. When (sadly it's not "if" anymore) the NOLA-gulf oil terminal is knocked out of action, this could have very grave consequences for the economy indeed.

When it comes to location in regard to natural/environmental factors it comes down to avoiding the obvious ones and trying the plan for the rest. There is no way I would buy on the Florida coast, I just don't see the logic in buying when you know the area gets hit by hurricanes. And why on earth would someone buy in a place called 'tornado alley?' I'm also not likely to ever buy a house built on stilts, I would constantly live in fear and who needs that drain on one's nerves?

California is funny though. We all know there are faults running across the whole state, not to mention it's mostly flood plain, but we live here anyway. I think the weather is a big factor in why a lot of us stay, though the heat in Sac makes this area less desireable than the BA and L.A for that reason. But I've lived in the Sac region for 20 years with very good luck and I hope it will continue to hold. And frankly, I'd rather risk the odd earthquake that hits every decade or so over hurricanes and tornado's that are a yearly occurrence.

And frankly, I’d rather risk the odd earthquake that hits every decade or so over hurricanes and tornado’s that are a yearly occurrence.

I thought Sacto is seismically stable (relatively speaking)...

I thought Sacto is seismically stable (relatively speaking)…

So far it has been extremely stable. *knocking wood furiously*
I was speaking in general terms of living in Ca.

I've already posted this in other active threads, but I think it bears repeating here:

The improvement on the quality of posts and volume of participation post-MP has exceeded my expectations. If I had known the impact would be this great, I would have banned him a long time ago –even without a vote.

@HARM: All speculation, of course, but if the gulf bay oil rigs are down for a couple months at the peak of the consumption season...and prices go up...and people stop spending...
Well, look out. : )

@SactoQT: but remember that severe hurricanes used to come once a decade too. Tornadoes are more common, but they affect such a small area that they are easy to overlook if you've grown up with them... I think the unfamiliar natural disasters always seem scarier...I'm guessing you're a west coast girl?

But I agree -- if this weather pattern continues, lots of people will be scared away from the gulf coast. I'm sure there would be people moving in to replace them (some people really do like Florida weather!), but it might drive prices down.

May we live in interesting times.

May we live in interesting times.

Well, the next thread basically discusses whether Mr. L is going to live in interesting times. ;)

@SactoQT: but remember that severe hurricanes used to come once a decade too. Tornadoes are more common, but they affect such a small area that they are easy to overlook if you’ve grown up with them… I think the unfamiliar natural disasters always seem scarier…I’m guessing you’re a west coast girl?

Definitely a west coaster. I have family that live in Oklahoma and Missouri and they are more sanguine about tornadoes and scared to death of earthquakes. Familiarity is certainly key when it comes to disasters of choice. :)

Hurricane Katrina has been downgraded (for the moment) to a category 4 hurricane, but they say that's only a 5mph difference in wind speed, so it's still going to be very ugly when it hits. I feel very bad for residents of NO right now.

But I agree — if this weather pattern continues, lots of people will be scared away from the gulf coast. I’m sure there would be people moving in to replace them (some people really do like Florida weather!), but it might drive prices down.

It would be amazing to me if the gulf coast becomes known for getting hit by hurricane's every year and yet people continue to buy and live there. Don't get it, never will.

May we live in interesting times.

Well, the next thread basically discusses whether Mr. L is going to live in interesting times.

This just in...

David Lereah has denounced all U.S. weathermen for claiming that Hurricane Katrina could reach New Orleans. He characterized anyone predicting widespread flooding as "Unsophisticated, the type of people who live in bunkers and wear tinfoil hats." He is recommending that everyone on Bourbon Street return to "partying as usual" and pay no attention to calls for evacuation.

This just in...

David Lereah has just been designated as a Category 5 liar by the National Weather Service.

@SactoQT: It would be amazing to me if the gulf coast becomes known for getting hit by hurricane’s every year and yet people continue to buy and live there. Don’t get it, never will.

I didn't mean to imply that they were bright people. :-)

The locals are already famous for building trailer parks in hurricane paths. I have a relative who bought a double-wide in northern FL last year, and before she moved down (fortunately), it was totalled in one of the hurricanes (or the combination of two of them...not sure). She got it replaced and a new one delivered to the same pad just a few months ago. She's now living down there and watching the season develop.

She (we) used to live in Rhode Island, where you grow to expect a certain amount of weather-related property destruction. Farsighted people bought big lots on the ocean and set their house a couple hundred yards back from the beach, planning to lose a few inches per year, or a foot or two in a really big storm. I watched a neighbor jack up his house and move it back 75 feet after hurricane Gloria (1992?). After hurricane Carol in the 50's, one whole row of houses on the side of a road was condemned. A few months later, they were torn down and the other side of the road became beachfront property. The remaining homeowners pushed for a tax-funded breakwater. Life goes on.

David Lereah has denounced all U.S. weathermen for claiming that Hurricane Katrina could reach New Orleans.

Lereah is starting to sound a lot like the "Iraqi Information Minister".
But--no joke about Katrina--it looks like a bad one; I wish them well.

RE familiarity with natural disasters, it's so true that what you grow up with seems like no big deal. I talk to people who've never lived in CA, and they think earthquakes are the scariest possible natural disaster. I grew up in tornado country and hardly see what the big deal is--just don't buy a trailer there. :-) Better yet, buy a brick house. They have a really narrow path of destruction, and most places in tornado prone areas have basements where you can go for protection when one comes along.

Despite the hurricane threats, I do have FL (inland a bit, protected a little from the storms, and not in a flood plain) on my list of potential places to move, because year-round tropical weather is such a big lure. Same with CA--lots of problems, natural and otherwise, but the natural beauty and the weather are huge pluses.

We do take into consideration natural disaster issues when trying to decide where we'd like to live, but job considerations and proximity to family will probably outweigh all else.

Was just listening to a report on CNN about people who live in Louisiana preparing for the hurricane, and it reminded me of probably the most unpredictable reason people live in places subject to many natural disasters: love of that place. It's just like loving a person--it's often to our own great personal and financial peril, but that doesn't stop us. And it often seems illogical to people looking at it from the outside. I guess this goes back to Jack's intangibles argument. :-)

@Jamie,

You may have a point here. Given that most of the city is 6 feet below sea level in an area prone to frequent flooding & storms, the fact you can get ANYONE to live there is testament to the Big Easy's powerful draw as a national cultural/tourist mecca. Even so, love (and easy credit) eventually has its limits.

So far the levee is holding. Thank goodness. If they make it another 24 hours, I'll bet NOLA will come back with a vengeance. Until next time.

The mayor called it a "once-in-a-lifetime" storm. Maybe.

Basically they're saying the storm took a left turn and lost some of its power. I'm glad NO seems to be in better shape than expected and hopefully the damage to the oil pipelines is not as severe as predicted.

The mayor called it a “once-in-a-lifetime” storm. Maybe.

It may well be for a lot of the folks there. According to the demographics 2000 census), a good deal of the population (42%) are between 25 and 54. So that means that the 25-36 crowd weren't even born yet when Camille (1969) came barreling through.

http://neworleans.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm

BayQT~

So that means that the 25-36 crowd weren’t even born yet when Camille (1969) came barreling through.

Definitely. But if volatile weather has become the norm for the gulf coast, the next one might not wait so long.

@Veritas: I haven't lived there, but do you really think they could rebuild the quarter and still have it be the heart of the city? Certainly it's the tourism center, and with the CBD it's the economic center.. But if the quarter was swamped, drained, and rebuilt...would it have the same magnetism?

Actually I heard wrong. The storm took a right turn and hammered Mississippi. Hopefully they'll end up ok too.

Something I read in Yahoo news:

Muddy six-foot waves crashed into the eastern shore of Mobile Bay, flooding stately, antebellum mansions and littering them with oak branches.

"There are lots of homes through here worth a million dollars. At least they were yesterday," said a shirtless Fred Wright. "I've been here 25 years, and this is the worst I've ever seen the water."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/hurricane_katrina

And so far, 55 people have been killed. :-(

BayQT~

@Veritas: However to me, and so many of us that lived there, the French Quarter IS New Orleans, and the rest is just the suburbs.

I've only visited, but I agree. While there are other nice parts of town, and some beautiful architecture throughout (and revitalization in some neighborhoods, lots of blight too), it's all about the Quarter. No American city compares.

I wonder how they would handle it if large parts of the vieux carré (or any important historic district in any city...Savannah, Charleston, etc) had to be rebuilt. I imagine there would be emergency codes passed, but would a "reproduction" historic district pass muster?

Fortunately, we don't have to find out yet. 55 people dead (most of them in Biloxi, I think) is tragic, but it could have been so much worse.

I rode out hurricane Georges in Biloxi, in a hotel on the beach with no power. I made toast and coffee on my camp stove for the three other people staying in the hotel, plus the hotel staff and a CNN crew. I was surprised and a little annoyed that they charged me full rate for the days without power. :-)

On the plus side, they’ll be able to bull doze down those slums and build some decent housing for the working class folks.

Unfortunately, many of the swamped neighborhoods were badly blighted, that's true. But it's a shame that all of the careful renovation work will probably have to be bulldozed too.

Even with a huge influx of insurance money, it will be too expensive to rebuild with any pretense of historical respect. It's a developer's opportunity -- buy up adjacent lots with condemned properties, build McCondos and bank on others to do the same, totally changing the character of the neighborhoods. Profit. The city will have to get some emergency legislation enacted to mandate construction of affordable housing, but the charms of the hoods will probably be lost, regardless.

The city will probably be one of the bigger buyers. They should use this as a chance to fix some big problems.

Sadly, the current report is that the French Quarter is now flooding because of a levee break. The Gov of Lousiana wants to evacuate EVERYONE. Plus, as you may have noticed, there haven't been reports of the number of dead in the New Orleans area....per the attached article, it's because they are busy rescuing the folks stranded on roofs, attics, in the water, etc....they are pushing aside the bodies of the dead to rescue the living.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,167781,00.html

BayQT~

I am worried about New Orleans. The Pontrachain levee broke and is flooding the city. Will the French Quarter survive?

I only had one chance to visit there, for a week before and a week after Mardi Gras. I stayed with a friend in college. What a great place.

I just saw some news coverage of the flooding in Louisiana and Mississippia and it is ugly. A cop was shot by some looters in New Orleans and everyone else is just frantic and upset. I just seems to shallow to worry about oil prices when people are suffering like that. It all makes me very sad.