Ian

dvcgirl67

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
What? Where did I suggest this? Building up can mean a stacked multi story condo, attached to others. Our city has tons of these. It allows you to house several families in a footprint smaller than several single family homes would take up. Condensed living doesn't mean tiny box sized apartments. There are many ways to maximize space in a small footprint. In addition, if people would just be willing to give up yards, you can fit a LOT more houses in smaller spaces. This allows you to not have to extend into areas that should not be developed.

And going "up" may also be single detached homes that go up on stilts. That definitely happened in my area after Sandy......and for all levels of housing. Just single homes that were raised up 8-12 feet. There were plenty of out of state companies that specialized in this that moved into our area.... a really specific skill.

I do think that there's a serious level of second homes in the destruction....lots of snow birds. Most of those people will be okay as they obviously have another place to go, and many of them have enough money to make necessary repairs. It's the year round middle class residents that are going to struggle. I can't think of a recent storm other than Katrina that will impact so many people.
 

Ms Bibbidi

DIS Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2022
I have often sat and contemplated where I could move and have the smallest risk of any natural disaster. So far, I haven’t found that place. I was lucky this time, but the next time it might be my roof gone, or my tree fallen on the house. I would like to find a place to live out the rest of my days without fear of storms, blizzards, fire, flood, earthquakes, etc. If anyone has any ideas, my ears are open.
You got me thinking. I have been through extreme heat waves, killer blizzards, a prairie fire, huge prairie dust storms, tornados, tropical storms, hurricanes, floods, a volcano eruption, extreme cold, earthquakes, a landslide, civil unrest, a crime ridden city, a pandemic and very dangerous flu. I too would still like to find a place to leave the drama behind and live out my days safely and in peace. When you find it, let us know.

Remember the story of The Three little Pigs who built their houses of straw, sticks and bricks. I recommend a fourth little pig and building a house of poured concrete with US steel reinforcements.
 
Last edited:

dvcgirl67

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
You got me thinking. I have been through extreme heat waves, killer blizzards, a prairie fire, tornados, tropical storms, hurricanes, floods, a volcano eruption, extreme cold, earthquakes, a landslide, civil unrest, a crime ridden city, a pandemic and very dangerous flu. I too would still like to find a place to leave the drama behind and live out my days safely and in peace. When you find it, let us know.

Remember the story of The Three little Pigs who built their houses of straw, sticks and bricks. I recommend a fourth little pig and buildings a house of poured concrete with US steel reinforcements.

The answer that I have...as someone in her mid-50s...nearing retirement with my husband....is to rent. There are places around the country and the world where we're planning to travel but we won't buy. There's too much uncertainty with climate change and the general state of affairs in our country/world. We plan to sell our house, travel...and rent.... so that we can pick up and go without the worry that comes from home ownership and/or living in a particular area, state or country. The idea of a catastrophic event taking out my home only to beholden to an insurance company that is hopefully solvent....no thanks.
 

dvcgirl67

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
And that's an even bigger argument for not just deciding not to rebuild in certain areas. The way things are going, you'd have to just not build in pretty much any part of the country. Without getting political, isn't it possible that maybe the locations aren't the problem...climate change is?

Well, climate change is certainly a big part of the problem. As I mentioned in another post in this thread....we've had three "1000 year flood events" in the last few months in this country....in Kentucky, Texas and Missouri. This "500 year flood event" with Ian...is the inland flooding from a hurricane that positive blew up in the last 24 hours...not just in strength, but in size as well with a ton of precipitation for inland communities. The number of hurricanes in a given year is attributed to "weather"....so if it's a La Niña, or El Niño, year. But man...when these hurricanes get into the Gulf of Mexico it's not even like it's a bathtub...it's a hot tub. The water temperature is two degrees warmer than "normal" (whatever that is anymore), and so whenever one ends up in the gulf...it's a serious "look out" situation.

So while I think that while climate change is affecting all areas of the country, if you live in an area where hurricanes are a predictable phenomenon....even before we really started heating up....those storms are going to be predictably worse. Same for people who live right on the coast with rising seas...you're going to have "sunny day flooding". And I also think this applies to California with the wildfires....a 20+ year drought with increased temperatures and overbuilding is a recipe for disaster. Insurers are likely going to look at those properties differently than properties in Tennessee, Texas and Missouri....or at least they did before those "1,000 year events"....which aren't really 1,000 year events anymore.
 

TLSnell1981

Tiny bubbles... make me happy... make me feel fine
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Well, climate change is certainly a big part of the problem. As I mentioned in another post in this thread....we've had three "1000 year flood events" in the last few months in this country....in Kentucky, Texas and Missouri. This "500 year flood event" with Ian...is the inland flooding from a hurricane that positive blew up in the last 24 hours...not just in strength, but in size as well with a ton of precipitation for inland communities. The number of hurricanes in a given year is attributed to "weather"....so if it's a La Niña, or El Niño, year. But man...when these hurricanes get into the Gulf of Mexico it's not even like it's a bathtub...it's a hot tub. The water temperature is two degrees warmer than "normal" (whatever that is anymore), and so whenever one ends up in the gulf...it's a serious "look out" situation.

So while I think that while climate change is affecting all areas of the country, if you live in an area where hurricanes are a predictable phenomenon....even before we really started heating up....those storms are going to be predictably worse. Same for people who live right on the coast with rising seas...you're going to have "sunny day flooding". And I also think this applies to California with the wildfires....a 20+ year drought with increased temperatures and overbuilding is a recipe for disaster. Insurers are likely going to look at those properties differently than properties in Tennessee, Texas and Missouri....or at least they did before those "1,000 year events"....which aren't really 1,000 year events anymore.
Hurricanes are not new events...neither are floods, earthquakes, famine,? fire, plagues, etc. They've been around for more than a minute.
 
Last edited:

fla4fun

DIS Veteran
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
You got me thinking. I have been through extreme heat waves, killer blizzards, a prairie fire, huge prairie dust storms, tornados, tropical storms, hurricanes, floods, a volcano eruption, extreme cold, earthquakes, a landslide, civil unrest, a crime ridden city, a pandemic and very dangerous flu. I too would still like to find a place to leave the drama behind and live out my days safely and in peace. When you find it, let us know.

Remember the story of The Three little Pigs who built their houses of straw, sticks and bricks. I recommend a fourth little pig and buildings a house of poured concrete with US steel reinforcements.
My house is built of concrete block, with rebar in the voids, and then poured solid with concrete. It also has a concrete tile hip roof. The blueprints called for block on the lower level and wood construction on the upper level, but we had it altered to all block, and requested the reinforcement. It is still scary as heck to ride out a hurricane in it.
 

dvcgirl67

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
Hurricanes are not new events...neither are floods, earthquakes, famine, fire, plagues, etc. They've been arLund for more than a minute.

Of course not...but the floods, famine, fire and plagues (leaving earthquakes out of the mix)....are becoming more frequent....and worse. That's climate change. We don't have to debate *why* the climate is changing. Some of us believe that man is contributing greatly to the increase in temperature, others may not believe in that at all....but there's no debate at all the our planet is warming up. That's a fact. Those of us who do believe that man is contributing greatly to climate change would like to see policies to mitigate the rise in temperatures for future generations....those who believe that man plays no role in our warming planet believe that we don't need to change a thing with respect to our use of fossil fuels...etc. But what is not up for debate is the severity of our floods, famines, wildfires and plagues...is worsening.
 

BrinkofSunshine

DIS Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2010
Orlando checking in… luckily not a ton of damage to my house, but our metal patio gazebo was destroyed. I drove around today and one of the neighborhoods near me is flooded- the two lakes overflowed and connected, it was unlike anything I’ve ever seen. There’s normally a street, sidewalk, and plenty of grass down to the lake in this photo!
 

Attachments

  • 14DE6573-7864-421C-8ED2-E0950F99EB38.jpeg
    14DE6573-7864-421C-8ED2-E0950F99EB38.jpeg
    188.3 KB · Views: 52

JLTraveling

DIS Veteran
Joined
Apr 3, 2005
Well, climate change is certainly a big part of the problem. As I mentioned in another post in this thread....we've had three "1000 year flood events" in the last few months in this country....in Kentucky, Texas and Missouri. This "500 year flood event" with Ian...is the inland flooding from a hurricane that positive blew up in the last 24 hours...not just in strength, but in size as well with a ton of precipitation for inland communities. The number of hurricanes in a given year is attributed to "weather"....so if it's a La Niña, or El Niño, year. But man...when these hurricanes get into the Gulf of Mexico it's not even like it's a bathtub...it's a hot tub. The water temperature is two degrees warmer than "normal" (whatever that is anymore), and so whenever one ends up in the gulf...it's a serious "look out" situation.

So while I think that while climate change is affecting all areas of the country, if you live in an area where hurricanes are a predictable phenomenon....even before we really started heating up....those storms are going to be predictably worse. Same for people who live right on the coast with rising seas...you're going to have "sunny day flooding". And I also think this applies to California with the wildfires....a 20+ year drought with increased temperatures and overbuilding is a recipe for disaster. Insurers are likely going to look at those properties differently than properties in Tennessee, Texas and Missouri....or at least they did before those "1,000 year events"....which aren't really 1,000 year events anymore.
I know. That's why I was in this thread for two full days before Ian hit, trying to warn people that it looked exactly like what we went through with Ida last year. The rapid intensification has become the new normal, unfortunately.

In addition to climate change, we also have to take a hard look at the changes we've made for convenience, that have destroyed natural patterns. For example, Katrina was actually weaker than Ida. But New Orleans flooded. Why? Well, a few reasons, but the biggest one was the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO). It was a manmade channel from the river to the Gulf of Mexico designed to make shipping easier. When they built it, they knocked out a lot of the wetlands that had always served as a natural hurricane buffer. And then when the water came, it rushed straight down that channel and into the city, overwhelming the levees.

Fortunately, the city and state decided to learn a lesson from that. MRGO has since been closed, and the wetlands restored (and the levees/flood walls beefed up). So even though Ida was a more powerful storm, the system held as it was designed to and we didn't flood.

Problem is, most municipalities are very unwilling to learn those lessons. They'd rather cater to big business. So not only are we heating up the planet and causing more extreme weather, but we're also destroying our natural protective barriers. And spending billions cleaning up every natural disaster instead. Makes no sense, really.
 

Bianca and Bernard

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2015
I-75 in both directions in North Port has been closed due to rising river/levee or bridge down ( have seen reports on all 3, os idk which is correct).

We still had flooding from the St John's river in our area today too.
 

dvcgirl67

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
I know. That's why I was in this thread for two full days before Ian hit, trying to warn people that it looked exactly like what we went through with Ida last year. The rapid intensification has become the new normal, unfortunately.

In addition to climate change, we also have to take a hard look at the changes we've made for convenience, that have destroyed natural patterns. For example, Katrina was actually weaker than Ida. But New Orleans flooded. Why? Well, a few reasons, but the biggest one was the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO). It was a manmade channel from the river to the Gulf of Mexico designed to make shipping easier. When they built it, they knocked out a lot of the wetlands that had always served as a natural hurricane buffer. And then when the water came, it rushed straight down that channel and into the city, overwhelming the levees.

Fortunately, the city and state decided to learn a lesson from that. MRGO has since been closed, and the wetlands restored (and the levees/flood walls beefed up). So even though Ida was a more powerful storm, the system held as it was designed to and we didn't flood.

Problem is, most municipalities are very unwilling to learn those lessons. They'd rather cater to big business. So not only are we heating up the planet and causing more extreme weather, but we're also destroying our natural protective barriers. And spending billions cleaning up every natural disaster instead. Makes no sense, really.
Oh, no doubt about it....the wetlands play a role here too from what I've read. The population in SW Florida has exploded over the last fifty years and a lot of the building was done on wetlands that would dampen the effects of a storm like this. According to the 2020 census, the population grew by a whopping 38% just since 2010. And...I'd imagine it's exploded further during the pandemic. As I mentioned, the person I know down there made the move permanently during the pandemic when both her and her husband's jobs converted to remote positions.

The blame game has also begun...saw at article in the NYT saying that evacuation order for Lee County (where the worst of the damage occurred) came over 24 hours later than surrounding counties.
 

NotUrsula

DIS Veteran
Joined
Apr 19, 2002
Yes, rebuilding can be done with a much higher margin of durability, but it requires re-thinking how buildings function and how buildings and landscaping should look. The code needs to be revised to take the future hurricane probability into account, not just to work for managing what we've already seen. Right now you can't go back to the old way of building Florida homes completely out of Cypress (the ideal stick-build structural material because water exposure strengthens it; this is why so many homes built in Florida before 1921 are still standing.) However, replanting Cypress liberally throughout the Florida wetlands would sure help in many ways .No one would be able to build with it for about 100 years until the trees mature, but in the meantime those trees and the marshes they stand in will help sequester pollutants and absorb storm surges.

Right now the future of coastal home new construction in Florida is raised ICF with pile-driven concrete foundations, as was done on the "Sand Palace" house that survived Michael in Mexico Beach. The pilings on that house are driven 30 feet deep, and the roof is tied down six ways to Sunday; steel hurricane anchors on every join, and steel cabling anchored to the pilings and running up through the walls, over the roof trusses and down the other side. Most of the windows are smaller than you might expect, and protrusions off the house are minimal. Some people have said it isn't very attractive, but it's built to take 250 mph winds, which sounds like a fair trade to me. But, if we add more reinforced concrete to the buildings themselves, flat concrete on the ground needs to be reduced, so that runoff is reduced. Garage doors are a weak point for wind-resistance on a typical home, so they need to be double-doored for flow-through if they are under the home, or detached if the home is one-story, so that wind that gets into the garage does not also get into the house.

It *is* more expensive to build this way, but that's a trade-off in square footage and finish. In Florida that's mostly about developers rather than homeowners doing their own builds, so I propose that developers should have to contribute to a statewide self-insurance endowment -- if you build it for profit, then you need to put some skin in the game of how much it will cost to repair if it's damaged by the climate; the stronger you build, the less you have to put in. The state and local communities need to draw a literal line in the sand with developers and insist on high-impact designs in sustainable projects that reduce runoff and resist wind. Retention pond requirements are a good start, but not enough. New land clearances should not be happening as often; there are plenty of areas where land can be re-used with existing infrastructure; so builders should be encouraged to do more with infill projects and renovations by limiting permitting that requires leveling of undeveloped land. Setbacks need to be increased to allow better drainage, and permiable ground surfaces should be required wherever they are feasible. The state also is a very good place to develop new solar technologies, but no one wants to invest as long as the state allows utilities to penalize homeowners who install solar.
 

dvcgirl67

DIS Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
Yes, rebuilding can be done with a much higher margin of durability, but it requires re-thinking how buildings function and how buildings and landscaping should look. The code needs to be revised to take the future hurricane probability into account, not just to work for managing what we've already seen. Right now you can't go back to the old way of building Florida homes completely out of Cypress (the ideal stick-build structural material because water exposure strengthens it; this is why so many homes built in Florida before 1921 are still standing.) However, replanting Cypress liberally throughout the Florida wetlands would sure help in many ways .No one would be able to build with it for about 100 years until the trees mature, but in the meantime those trees and the marshes they stand in will help sequester pollutants and absorb storm surges.

Right now the future of coastal home new construction in Florida is raised ICF with pile-driven concrete foundations, as was done on the "Sand Palace" house that survived Michael in Mexico Beach. The pilings on that house are driven 30 feet deep, and the roof is tied down six ways to Sunday; steel hurricane anchors on every join, and steel cabling anchored to the pilings and running up through the walls, over the roof trusses and down the other side. Most of the windows are smaller than you might expect, and protrusions off the house are minimal. Some people have said it isn't very attractive, but it's built to take 250 mph winds, which sounds like a fair trade to me. But, if we add more reinforced concrete to the buildings themselves, flat concrete on the ground needs to be reduced, so that runoff is reduced. Garage doors are a weak point for wind-resistance on a typical home, so they need to be double-doored for flow-through if they are under the home, or detached if the home is one-story, so that wind that gets into the garage does not also get into the house.

It *is* more expensive to build this way, but that's a trade-off in square footage and finish. In Florida that's mostly about developers rather than homeowners doing their own builds, so I propose that developers should have to contribute to a statewide self-insurance endowment -- if you build it for profit, then you need to put some skin in the game of how much it will cost to repair if it's damaged by the climate; the stronger you build, the less you have to put in. The state and local communities need to draw a literal line in the sand with developers and insist on high-impact designs in sustainable projects that reduce runoff and resist wind. Retention pond requirements are a good start, but not enough. New land clearances should not be happening as often; there are plenty of areas where land can be re-used with existing infrastructure; so builders should be encouraged to do more with infill projects and renovations by limiting permitting that requires leveling of undeveloped land. Setbacks need to be increased to allow better drainage, and permiable ground surfaces should be required wherever they are feasible. The state also is a very good place to develop new solar technologies, but no one wants to invest as long as the state allows utilities to penalize homeowners who install solar.

This all makes sense for sure. But I think they're also going to have to go "up"....and "way up" if they decide to build on those barrier islands. I read an account today of a woman who lives on Sanibel who decided to stay. Her home was elevated 11 ft and yet the storm surge reached the bottom of her *second* floor balcony. So...that's an 18-20 ft storm surge that they had out there....which is insane.
 

TLSnell1981

Tiny bubbles... make me happy... make me feel fine
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Of course not...but the floods, famine, fire and plagues (leaving earthquakes out of the mix)....are becoming more frequent....and worse. That's climate change. We don't have to debate *why* the climate is changing. Some of us believe that man is contributing greatly to the increase in temperature, others may not believe in that at all....but there's no debate at all the our planet is warming up. That's a fact. Those of us who do believe that man is contributing greatly to climate change would like to see policies to mitigate the rise in temperatures for future generations....those who believe that man plays no role in our warming planet believe that we don't need to change a thing with respect to our use of fossil fuels...etc. But what is not up for debate is the severity of our floods, famines, wildfires and plagues...is worsening.
No debate? Hmmm.
 
Joined
Sep 25, 2000
The answer that I have...as someone in her mid-50s...nearing retirement with my husband....is to rent. There are places around the country and the world where we're planning to travel but we won't buy. There's too much uncertainty with climate change and the general state of affairs in our country/world. We plan to sell our house, travel...and rent.... so that we can pick up and go without the worry that comes from home ownership and/or living in a particular area, state or country. The idea of a catastrophic event taking out my home only to beholden to an insurance company that is hopefully solvent....no thanks.
I love you - and that is my plan too.
 

TLSnell1981

Tiny bubbles... make me happy... make me feel fine
Joined
Sep 15, 2006
Well...no debate the our planet is getting warmer. That's happening. Even those who are climate change deniers admit to that. The only debate is over *why* the planet is warming....and if anything should be done about it. That's all I meant by that.
Well that was totally expected. No room for natural cycles of warming and cooling that have occurred over the last million or so years.
 

jalapeno_pretzel

DIS Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2015
Well that was totally expected. No room for natural cycles of warming and cooling that have occurred over the last million or so years.

Correct. The question is… are we in a natural cycle of warming or is man contributing to it or enhancing it…or both.


Yeah, that is called the Milankovitch cycle, in which the earth's axis varies in it's tilt over a period of about 41,000 years., it's orbital shape varies from more circular to more elliptical over a period of about 100,000 years, and it's axis procession (i.e. wobble) varies over a period of about 20,000 years.

Problem is, the part of that cycle we're in is one in which the global temperature average should be very stable or even cooling.
 








GET A NO-OBLIGATION VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!

Top