[StBernard] Duany meeting

[Westley Annis]

Deborah,

I must commend you for staying as long as you did. I stayed for 30 minutes.
My opinion in a nut shell ...I  think this is a joke. 

Only on perhaps two or three occasions have we ever had water as high as the
curb in our streets in the 32 years we lived in St. Bernard Parish. It is
ludicrous for parish officials or anyone else, to begin to think that
residents with slab homes should comply to such a plan. Further adding
insult to injury inferring that perhaps if you do not comply you may not be
able to buy insurance coverage for your home.

Of course this takes the focus off of what should be done in the very first
place, BUILD BETTER LEVEES,CLOSE THE MRGO,BUILD A BETTER PROTECTION SYSTEM,
and REPLANT THE WETLANDS that were destroyed by all of the overbuilding to
begin with.

These people are definitely taking the focus off of the GOVERNMENT'S
responsibility. BUILDING A SAFER LEVEE PROTECTION SYSTEM for their own
CITIZENS!

The responsibility is now placed on the hard working citizens of St. Bernard
Parish, with costs that will be astronomical. Those citizens who had no
insurance or those underinsured will not be able to afford the cost of
raising their homes.

 Many citizens will have to move elsewhere because they will fear going
through this again.

These proposals "PLANS" are taking our eyes off the real focus here. The
responsibility of the GOVERNMENT for not providing the protection to our
citizens that is deserved in the first place.

Now they are turning the focus and responsibility on to the
citizens....making the citizens responsible...at a very high cost...of
either paying for raising our homes ...how many thousands of homes need to
be raised...and at what costs...to each citizen...making others rich or
richer...or not being able to buy insurance...with the risk of continuing to
live in an area in which the GOVERNMENT refuses to take responsibility for
doing their job...of building CAT 5 levee protection...CLOSING THE
MRGO...ETC...ETC... 

We try to teach our children at a very young age about responsibility...and
that they are responsible for their actions...well here we are with the
"Katrina" situation THE RESPONSIBILITY clearly lies with those people in
charge of protecting their citizens from harm...and we had a lesson with
Betsy...where was the lesson learned here? 

How do we teach our children to be responsible when we have a government who
is now shifting their responsibility onto the citizens of St. Bernard?

As far as FEMA...FEMA is really a very bad joke... 

CLM 
   

> -----------------------------------------------------

> 

> I attended, along with hundreds of others, the presentation tonight 

> given by Andres Duany. I could only stay for the first hour, but 

> knowing how hungry many who could not make it tonight are for news by 

> other than the professional media, here goes. The presentation is 

> supposed to be available on a website next week.

>  

> After 15 min. of introductions, Andres led off with an informative set 

> of slides that depicted the seven types of homes in the parish and 

> gave his opinion. He started with homes because he felt that was what 

> was on the minds of majority of the people, and he was right. The 

> seven home types and his comments were:

>  

> Antebellum plantations-historically sigificant, need to find funding 

> to restore and preserve Victorian cottages-historically significant, 

> quality construction, good investment to repair, will hold resale 

> value, these are already on piers off the ground and can be raised 

> higher for about $30,000 if need be Turn of century cottages and 

> pre-war homes -similar to Victorian just not as historic Post war 

> (i.e. late 1940s) -low quality, boxy, single baths, extremely small, 

> not worth repairing from a financial perspective, not a demand for 

> such small houses, better investment to demolish and rebuild new 1950 

> thru 1970 ranch tract homes-abundance of tract subdivisions of one 

> story ranch houses with significant damage that are on slabs that cost 

> $80,000 or more if you could raise them on piers, recommends 

> demolishing 1980s to present- he called them McMansions and refers to 

> the custom designed and built homes of 3,000 sq ft or more that have 

> modern conveniences, appliances, insulation, etc. These also can't be 

> raised for $30,000, but if the second floor isn't damaged it may be

financially worth it to repair the first floors.

>  

> With regards to FEMA is anyone surprised that FEMA didn't issue the 

> draft of the proposed base flood plain maps? Duany said the new date 

> is March 30. He also said that from past experience, the initial 

> "draft" elevations given by FEMA changes very little from their final 

> version that will come months later. His experience tells him that the 

> elevations may be raised a few feet higher than the last set of flood 

> plain maps, but not 15 ft. He explained that if we had no levees, FEMA 

> would simply say the elevation would be the high water mark, as they 

> told Mississippi. However, we have levees so it would be unreasonable 

> to ignore the protection of the levees altogther and that's what makes it

a judgement call for FEMA.

>  

> ( I guess struggling is a good adjective. In my opinion, no one 

> flooded due to rainwater. We all flooded, whether a few feet or 15 

> feet, due to levee overtopping and breaches. So if FEMA's new maps 

> state base flood elevations

> 2 or 3 feet higher, and it was a street that has never flooded, why 

> raise the house elevation at all unless it's raise high enough to 

> withstand a breach?  It's a different case if a neighborhood has been 

> experiencing rainwater flooding and these maps will correct those 

> cases. For example. my house slab built in 1988 is El 3.5 ft. and has 

> never had rainwater rise above the street curb. The Katrina water 

> reached El. 12.5 ft. If I was to demo and rebuild, my choices would be 

> to rebuild to El. 3.5 which is high enough for rain events or El. 13.5 so

that a levee breach would matter.

> Anything in between means I'll get less wet than Katrina in a levee break.

> But rebuilding means I have to meet the new flood maps and that may 

> say I have to build to El. 6. What does that accomplish?  Since my 

> house was built after 1975 and I meet the current base flood 

> elevation, as long as I repair, I do not have to raise the house if I 

> don't want to. And since it will cost $80k or more, according to Duany 

> to raise a slab house, I'll spend the money on more flood insurance 

> coverage instead.)

>  

> He said that existing pier homes could be raised a few feet higher or 

> the lot levels raised and then placed higher or homes could be built 

> such that the min. height of the first floor piers has enough room to 

> use as a carport/garage area.

>  

> Duany then spoke about modular homes. (Refer to the article in the TP 

> a few weeks ago or go to 

> http://homebuying.about.com/cs/modulareducation/a/modularhomes.htm for 

> a good explanation.) He said that the parish needs to monitor for 

> architectural quality on these homes. I take that to mean that when 

> done right, you can't tell the difference, but if a homeowner wants to 

> cut costs, they can be dull and boxy. I have heard experts say that 

> they aren't necessarily cheaper per sq.ft., but they are fast to build 

> and will meet the new local building codes. They can be built on any 

> height foundation.  He said that the parish should allow the many 

> stick (conventional) and modular builders a central site to build 

> model homes that could be a one stop shop for buyers to see the 

> quality, negotiate price, and contract for a quality home. He said 

> competition will increase the quality offered and decrease the selling

price (economics 101).

>  

> Then I had to leave. Maybe somebody can do this for what happened after

7pm.

>  

> Deborah Keller