Why Jersey *Shouldn’t* Rebuild the Shore After Sandy | The Philly Post

Today in contrarianism: The Atlantic Cities has a post up by Columbia researcher Klaus Jacob arguing that trying to rebuild the Jersey Shore is a terrible idea. Trying to construct wildly expensive storm-resilient or storm-accommodating shorelines, as New York and New Jersey are trying to do, requires funding both states probably don’t have. Same goes for regular folks.

For individual homeowners, the options are bleak. The cost to accommodate, to raise a structure—if that’s even technically possible—normally far exceeds insurance claims. But to not raise it or otherwise adapt means increasing insurance premiums by factors of five or more, making flood insurance simply unaffordable for many (though it is mandatory for mortgage holders). Selling is not a viable option either, since many home prices have plummeted below half the original cost. Owners can become trapped with foreclosure as the only option—which is why governments need to take a leading role in developing other, more feasible, options.

Instead of rebuilding, he says, it’s better to \”retreat.\” New construction should be disallowed in low-lying areas, and the rebuilding effort should take place on safer ground.

continue via blogs.phillymag.com

BY SIMON VAN ZUYLEN-WOOD

\"Enhanced

This post was imported from a legacy archive. Please excuse any formatting inconsistencies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *