Superstorm Sandy Dictates a New Approach to Atlantic Coastal Development
In March 2011, I wrote a four-part article  on the implications of Atlantis on our current culture. Using my vortexual theory
  of history, I compared the concept of Atlantean-elite thinking to our 
treatment  of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Without 
repeating all that I  said about New Orleans being the new Atlantis,  I can now update those concepts with new information. When  Superstorm Sandy barreled up the East Coast of the  United States, she  trailed a banner reading, “Here I come. Are you ready for the New Atlantis?”
United States, she  trailed a banner reading, “Here I come. Are you ready for the New Atlantis?”
The myth of Atlantis is a cautionary tale. It is about a proud, arrogant
 elite  dominating a culture and denying the changes to its own climate 
and its own  mortality. As the Atlantean culture sank beneath the ocean 
waves, the elites  denied their problem until it was too late. Like 
Atlantis, the lessons of  Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans remain 
obscure. Now, with Superstorm Sandy  fresh on our minds, we have another
 chance to learn from disaster. If we learn our lessons, we  may chart a better course for the future of the Mid-Atlantic region. 
For
 now, I will leave it to others to judge whether the initial search, 
recovery  and disaster relief efforts were well planned and executed. 
Here in the West,  the impact of Superstorm Sandy has been minimal. 
Media reports only hint at the  deprivation and discomfort that many 
still feel. While writing this article, I  stopped to send the text 
message “Redcross” to 90999. With  that action, I donated $10 to relief efforts in the wake of Superstorm Sandy.
In the aftermath of Katrina, disorganization, waste, fraud, graft and 
corruption  drained away assets and energy from legitimate hurricane 
relief. Although it was  obvious to many that New Orleans would never 
return to its pre-Katrina size,  shape and population, our  collective consciousness
 demanded otherwise. In the ensuing years, we saw  formaldehyde-laced 
trailers brought in for displaced families. Actor Brad Pitt's 
architecturalcompetition attempted to create homes that could  withstand Katrina type flooding. Like monuments to old energy thinking, a few  Brad Pitt Houses now stand, waiting for their test in the next big  hurricane.
When Hurricane Katrina led to collapse of levees around New Orleans, the
  flooding was quick and deep. Residents caught in the flood either 
found their  way to attics and roofs, or drowned in their own homes. 
Wind did not cause most  of the damage, but rather it was the onslaught 
of deep water. Now, over seven  years later, we hear of people trapped 
in their homes on Staten Island and other low-lying places near the 
shore. This time,  wind-driven storm surge multiplied the effects of an 
astronomical high tide. Unlike New Orleans under Katrina, huge waves  pummeled the mid-Atlantic shoreline.
After Katrina, roofs of intact houses poked above the floodwater. Along 
the  beaches of New Jersey, wave action and tidal surge ripped homes off
 their  foundations. Water and wind sent them inland, battering against 
their  defenseless neighbors. After Sandy, near the shoreline, many 
houses no longer  exist. Soon enough, the focus will turn to 
“rebuilding”  homes and neighborhoods. To that, I ask the question, 
“Rebuilding what, where  and how?”
Many yearn for the nostalgia of the old coastline, with its cottages, 
piers and  amusement parks. Sentimental people will want to rebuild the 
old communities exactly as they were. Politicians will pander to those 
desires. With sufficient  political
 pressure, Congress will authorize billions of dollars to rebuild 
shoreline housing. Climate Change deniers will deem Superstorm Sandy an 
anomaly, unrelated to  human-caused degradation  of the Earth’s atmosphere. With reconstruction funds available, the profit motive will  once again try to dominate  legitimate environmental concerns.
In my 2011 Atlantis articles, I advocated for an apolitical, 
environment-first  approach to disaster recovery. By then, it was too 
late to bring rational  thinking to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. 
Soon after Superstorm Sandy is  the best time to discuss our long-term 
response and recovery plans. Stakeholders  include homeowners, local, state and federal governments, plus all U.S.  citizens. After all, we the taxpayers will ultimately pay most of the bill for  both cleanup and
 rebuilding. Here I propose a new solution for rebuilding  residential 
properties most vulnerable to mid-Atlantic storm surge.
First, we need a complete review of the  federal flood insurance program
 for the affected area. No one in the new floodplain should rebuild 
under existing flood insurance programs. The flood  maps were inadequate
 and the potential for future destruction in those areas is  high. If 
anyone rebuilds in a Sandy-flooded area, it should be at his or her own 
 expense and risk, not at the risk of all.
Second, new flood maps must include more than the area flooded by Superstorm  Sandy. In 2012, most of what remained of the Greenland ice cap melted away. In the next few years, both polar  ice caps may be gone. New flood
 maps for the mid-Atlantic region should  include the consequent sea 
level rise. With a realistic flood map, we can begin  the redevelopment 
of residential properties not deemed in imminent peril.
Third, we need to demand new structures that make sense to build and 
insure. As  the beaches of New Jersey now show us, rebuilding with 
wood-frame houses is out  of the question. Built on piles, a Brad Pitt 
House is still vulnerable to high winds. The best way to rebuild  would 
be with rapidly relocatable or  mobile housing. Although new standards for durability, insulation and storm  worthiness would be necessary, the following is what I propose.
As in  Paris under Napoleon, authorities would need to cut new access roads wide
  enough for manufactured homes to travel inland. Similar to those in an
 RV A  residential lot would feature a concrete pad to support the home 
and utility  service connections. The utilities would need to withstand 
wind, rain and  salt-water immersion. To avoid the threat of fire, both 
natural gas and  electrical services should have smart meters that 
feature remote shut-off capabilities. The actual housing could be of 
several  different types.
For the most vulnerable lots, housing should be highly mobile. In most 
cases, a Class-A motorhome would suffice. Likewise, a fifth-wheel  
motorhome would work on vulnerable lots, but a pickup truck capable of  
towing the fifth wheel would have to be on scene. Monthly road tests 
should be  required. If a storm appeared, the owner could disconnect 
from the water, gas  and electric in less than an hour. Within two hours, the mobile summer cottage  could be well inland and out of harm’s way.
For those who want a more substantial dwelling, an axle and  wheel-mounted manufactured home would suffice. The recreational vehicle (RV)  industry designates many such dwellings as “park  models”.
 Since these dwellings would move only in the event of an emergency,  
attention to hitch-type and wheel/tire durability would be essential. If
 planned  properly, any  over-the-road tractor
 could tow these manufactured homes to safety. For  these larger units, 
turning radius, ground clearance and inland storage  locations would be 
important. In case of emergency, regional plans for towing these larger 
units to safety would need to be in place.
 The alternative to creating mobile  seaside villages
 would be to rebuild with vulnerable permanent structures or forgo 
rebuilding entirely. During the  recent presidential campaign, both 
sides talked about bringing manufacturing  jobs back to America. The 
best way to do so is by upgrading the factory-built  home and RV 
industries. In the U.S., RV's and manufactured homes have no foreign  
competition. To redevelop mid-Atlantic shoreline housing with anything 
but  relocatable dwellings and weather-resistant infrastructure would be
 sheer folly.
                 
By James McGillis at 10:12 AM | Environment | Comments (1) | Link

No comments:
Post a Comment