FEMA says flood-damaged New Orleans homes should be raised

[seafan]

FEMA says flood-damaged New Orleans homes should be raised

4/12/2006, 7:39 p.m. CT
By BRETT MARTEL
The Associated Press


NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A long-awaited government projection on this city's flood danger recommends that thousands of homes and businesses in areas ravaged by Hurricane Katrina be raised at least 3 feet, a requirement that clears the way for residents to decide how, or whether, to rebuild.

snip

The Federal Emergency Management Agency had delayed the release of the advisories several times since the start of the year as researchers incorporated new post-Katrina data.
The government recommended that levee-protected homes damaged by flooding during Katrina be raised by 3 feet, but some residents may have to lift their homes higher, depending on the elevation and location of their property.

Federal aid is available to pay for raising houses, but many homeowners could still be stuck paying for a portion of the costs, which can be $40,000 for the first foot.
Powell and other officials declined to estimate how many homes would have to be raised. Powell described the recommendations as good news for homeowners, saying raising a house no more than 3 feet is "not that dramatic."

snip

Jeb Bruneau, president of a neighborhood association in the city's Lakeview area, was relieved that the recommendations had been released.
"This will spur activity unbelievably," he predicted. "A lot of people have been waiting for the advisory to come out so they'd have direction. A lot of people are looking at this as progress."

snip

Raising a house typically involves lifting it with hydraulic jacks and constructing new wooden or steel supports.

The job can take one to two weeks and generally costs about $40,000 for the first foot, and $8,000 to $12,000 for each additional foot, said Phil Pieri, regional manager for a Texas-based foundation-repair company that operates in 18 states.

snip

http://www.nola.com/newsflash/louisiana/index.ssf?/base/news-24/1144889055108400.xml&storylist=louisiana

[khair75092]

1. Of course!!!

Gives the big land developers a chance to go in and buy up properties for next to nothing!

[MadMaddie]

2. So for the poor homeowners...the report is basically saying

that they can't rebuild unless they raise the houses...

Wow the government is doing a grand job in helping to remove the poor aren't they...?:sarcasm:

Let me guess... a no bid contract to......Phil Pieri, regional manager for a Texas-based foundation-repair company that operates in 18 states.

[kittenpants]

3. I thought it was supposed to say "razed."

And I was ready to jump all over the spelling error. Damn! x(

[MercutioATC]

5. Me, too. "Raised" is a more positive solution...

[dipsydoodle]

12. Raised/razed

Reckon that maybe a unique word combination. Two words which sound exactly the same but mean complete opposites.

Especially unfortunate with regard to this particular issue because whether it's razed or raised may turn out to be function of what colour or race the home owner may be.

[drm604]

13. Me to! n/t

[Lochloosa]

24. drm604....I get LOTS of comments on my bumper sticker.

Thanks. Mostly positive.

I always ask the negative ones "why shouldn't he be impeached?" usually just get a blank stare.

[drm604]

27. Do people understand it?

Or do you have to explain it to them? I've only sold a couple, I've been thinking that people either don't like it or they don't understand it.

[Lochloosa]

28. I've had to explain it a few times.

I think the problem is there are over 300 stickers with the same general theme at cafepress.

[drm604]

30. Believe it or not

I thought I was being original. :eyes: I guess great minds think alike - 300 great minds!

[baby_mouse]

26. I, Also!

We are too wise, kitten lady.

Please do not eat me

[uppityperson]

4. Some people are gutting their houses and waiting to see what levees do

this season. See if they hold.

[Jayhawk Lib]

6. Rebuilding below sea level

is absolutely asinine.

[darkmaestro019]

7. Tell it to the Dutch. eom

[ConcernedCanuk]

11. Does Holland get annual multiple hurricanes?

.
.
.

New Orleans is in a known hurricane path - so with that in mind

I believe it IS a bit insane to keep rebuilding there

[kestrel91316]

31. LET those who can afford it, rebuild. Provide some sort of partial

subsidy to help those who have SOME of the money to rebuild. Buy out at a fair price those who can't, and help them start over somewhere else.

But for pete's sake, put the newly rebuilt homes up on STILTS!!!!!! Or a raised concrete foundation.

[theHandpuppet]

14. The Dutch have installed the infrastructure to deal with it

The Dutch made a commitment of vision and money to create the infrastructure necessary to deal with life below sea level. I see no such commitment towards NOLA or any other coastal cities. Sorry to say, but NOLA will continue to be in the crosshairs of hurricanes and unless a massive project is undertaken to deal with rising water and the increased likelihood of potentially disastrous storms, simply rebuilding homes won't solve the problem. What happens the next time the old levees break or a hurricane stops by? What is being done to restore the wetlands and barrier islands, the city's best line of defense? Meanwhile, the city is STILL sinking.

[darkmaestro019]

18. That was sort of my point: I just find some things more important

than money. Like history, art, ambience--irreplaceable things. Heinlein said in the book I'm struggling through (his style drives me crazy) something along the lines that money is something you can always get more of.

We cannot get any more New Orleans.

[theHandpuppet]

21. Rebuilding NOLA and its infrastructure not mutually exclusive concepts

It's just that you need to invest in restoring the wetlands and barrier islands, plus invest in the latest technologies (we could borrow from the Dutch) *before* just throwing up a bunch of housing to replace that which was destroyed. No insurer in their right mind would offer affordable coverage to someone who chose to rebuild in the flooded wards of NOLA unless major changes are made. Same for banks -- would you finance a new house the way things stand now?

Ambience is fine, but if you're serious about preserving NOLA and all its history then PRACTICAL measures MUST be taken to make sure the city isn't going to get swallowed up. That's the real lesson to be learned from the Dutch. They got serious about preserving their history, their art and their society by taking major and expensive steps to preserve it.

[Jayhawk Lib]

15. The Dutch do not have much choice because

most of the country is below seal level. That is not the case here.

[LA lady]

8. absolutely correct.

THANK YOU!!

We know people who have been rebuilt with national flood insurance 3 times in the same place. They are making them move higher this time and I think it's right.

You have no concept of how low some of these areas are unless you have lived down here.They don't bury above ground for the fun of it.

[theHandpuppet]

16. A case in point...

The original settlers of my old hometown (Portsmouth, Ohio) built their village on the west side of the congruence of the Scioto and Ohio Rivers. Trouble was, the west side was a flood plain and after several springs of finding their homes and fields underwater, they moved the entire town to the higher east side. If they hadn't done this the town would not have survived. (After the '37 flood they added floodwalls. too. )

So the question is, why couldn't the rebuilding of NOLA be moved farther north, say, north of Lake Pontchartrain? wouldn't that make sense in the long run?

[Psephos]

9. Many on this thread don't seem to realize this is a lenient rule

Too lenient, in the opinion of some. A lot of people expected the rule to be ten feet, which would be extremely expensive.

Three feet is an implicit recognition that the levees are going to be made much stronger. The floodwalls are going to be stripped off, and fundamental improvements made to the earthworks. I see that $2.5 billion has been earmarked for that job.

Give credit when credit is due. Otherwise, we start to sound like Scientologists. Don't worry, there's plenty of other stuff to bitch about. :-)

Peace.

[pitohui]

10. i agree three feet is a joke

they don't have the balls to tell people what they need to do to be safe

[DoYouEverWonder]

17. If , and that's a big if, the levees are rebuilt

properly, 3 feet above grade should be enough.

This is a reasonable agreement and will finally allow the people of NO to go home.

People know the risks but we're talking a major US city going to ruin otherwise. Not a good option.

Most houses, even the shotgun shacks were already on pilings. Those houses can be raised relatively easily.

The people with the biggest problems are the ones in the suburbs who live in homes built on slabs. Those are the house that will end up being destroyed and rebuilt.

[FlaGranny]

32. After Hurricane Andrew

in the Miami area, some slab-built homes were raised. Saw it on some TV program. One home was raised up high enough to put a parking garage and utility room under the home. It was an interesting show and I am sure it was very expensive to do.

Edit: In the Florida Keys new homes must be built high to allow for flooding. Most of them don't look like they're on stilts - they look like 2 stories with the bottom story usually being the garage. Even mobile homes there must be jacked up, I think a minimum of 6 or 8 feet.

[supernova]

19. Word Nazi Alert: It's "RAZED" not raised

You raze a building and raise a child.

[wallybarron]

20. No you're wrong

[theHandpuppet]

23. I'm also a word Nazi, but in this case you are incorrect

In the article they're talking about raising the homes by three feet, not razing (destroying) them.

[SoCalDem]

34. In BushCo Land.. they really do "mean" RAZE..

:cry:...

because insurance companies won't NOW, and won't likely pick up this cost..Poor people with paid off homes, are not required to have insurance, and lots cannot afford it anyway. If their house stood for 100 years or more, they trusted the levee system and lots did not have insurance..

NOLA survived the hurricane..it was the shoddy levees that did them in...

Commanding an impossible task is a sure way to get poor people to walk away, and clears the path for the rich folks to buy up the "abandoned" property...

[hedgehog]

22. Better yet, why not do as the Dutch are now experimenting with

Build houses designed to float off their foundations as needed during a storm.

[Lochloosa]

25. This is a bullshit recommendation. NO is still sinking

and will continue to sink. This idea has been raised before and dismissed. The only way to protect the city is to build better levees and/or remove the canals.

[wordpix]

29. the question is, is 3 ft. enough considering the present infrastructure?

[Jose Diablo]

33. Hey, I got a better idea

Instead of spending about $52K per house to raise each one 3 feet, why not take that money and build a good set of levee's. Levee's capable of a category 5 storm and surge.

Instead of spreading the cost of recovery at $52K per house per pop, the money can come from the top 1% income people, in this country. Maybe even clip the 50 largest corporations for that effort, with the largest chunk coming from haliburton, after all, haven't they already recieved about $10B of the reconstruction money from the feds, to rebuild? I'd say $10B would go a long way in rebuilding the levee's the way they should have been to begin with.

[Bridget Burke]

35. After the 1900 Storm, Galveston's grade was raised up to 11 feet.

Some areas did not need to be raised that far. Houses & utilities were jacked up & slurry (made from sand) was pumped in.



The Seawall was also built & Galveston has weathered strong storms since then. Still, evacuation is recommended when there's a Big One in the Gulf. And large parts of the Island, not developed in 1900, could sustain heavy damage.

www.1900storm.com/rebuilding/index.lasso

The idea is definitely worth considering. Along with strengthening the levees. And rebuilding the wetlands--which are mostly covered with water now; they have not been "developed."

[Xithras]

36. What? There were areas under 10 feet of water!

Yeah, raising them 3 feet will REALLY help. At least the drywall on the ceiling will be spared the next time around :eyes: