Is there anyone in Corpus who still thinks sinking billions into luxury resorts on the islands is the way to go?

And how will Todd Hunter work with the insurance industry to guarantee people who do will be able to piggy back their rates on the backs of the rest of us?

I've never thought it was a good idea and was hoping IKE would have swept away Tortuga Dunes, but to no avail.

EDIT: And I'm sure, somehow, the cost of insuring other people's million dollar homes on the beach will be passed along to us.

[This message has been edited by Peter Gibbons (edited 9/15/2008 12:31p).]

The problem isn't building on barrier islands. The problem is with people who think that they shouldn't pay more insurance for doing so and for people who think the government should subsidize their existance on said islands.

By the way, I live on the island.

Just my $0.02

People that live there to support industry, farm, ranch, etc. to work and otherwise make a living, I don't really feel bad when Federal Flood insurance or private insurance funds are spent following a disaster. To a large extent to repair/replace working folks homes is no different than rebuilding a city after a tornado.

What does bug me is insuring some rich persons multimillion dollar vacation home, or peoples 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc investment rental property. It's those people that use our insurance dollars to cover their butts that ticks me off.

While we're at it, why not make building 50 miles or closer to the coast off limits as well, eh?

Then there's earthquake zones, those that live near volcanoes, tornado alley etc.

[This message has been edited by p_bubel (edited 9/15/2008 7:40p).]

It is their property and they can build wherever they want I suppose. But they cannot get the loan to do so without insurance being available that they are willing to pay. If they were being asked to pay premiums commensurate with the risk they would not build because it would be too expensive.

So, their insurance friendly state rep gets the rates rigged so all of us who live on high ground get to share the premiums so that the risk becomes manageable for the people who want to build in the dunes.

I live on high ground because it is safer and my house is less prone to flooding. I don't like paying much higher premiums so I can subsidize some snowbird who thinks living on the beach is wonderful.

I guess that is selfish of me.

Tough love huh Huisache? FU man. There are people that live on Bolivar Peninsula, a barrier island, whose homes were nothing more than shacks. I would hope that you could be a little more sympathetic in times like these. Sure, there were very nice homes out there, some would say resort quality but many folks had a lot tied up down there. My home is completely lost, not even a slab on Bolivar. I was willing to pay the insurance premiums, that were more than double my premiums for my house in Houston.

There are folks that live on these barrier islands year around and they understand the risks associated with doing so, inculding losing everything you own. Why don't give them a bit of time to collect their bearings before you start spouting off and passing judgement.

Never having been on Bolivar, I did not direct my comments in that direction. I specifically mentioned Corpus and was talking to others from around here about the proposed monster development that was a big issue here last year before being scuttled when the locals refused to allow closing part of the beach for them.

I note you are a realtor. Local realtors were all for the development but I could never get one to talk about the wisdom of building on a barrier island to begin with.

There is a great function which such islands offer to the mainland---the slow down surges.

They are also prone to being eroded if they are built on. Take a look at a map of the US eastern coast from 1900 and then look at one for 2000. Where did all that land go? To development which led to erosion.

All this has been known to coastal geologists forever. But there is money to be made in selling flood prone land to people who just have to live on the coast.

AS someone who has a lot to fear from hurricanes' damage inland, I am not immune to sympathy for those who have lost their lives or property or who are holed up in some gym in central Texas. I could be one of them if the storm had gone further south.

The point of my post was to stimulate conversation among people down here about whether stimulating growth on narrow barrier islands is really a good idea.

The insurance issue came to mind because a former legislator who is trying to get back into office this year is extraordinarily well connected with and well versed in the particulars of the issue and has been touting that as a reason to reelect him.

I am sorry for your loss and share your love of the coast. Please accept my apologies if I seemed callous

If you vote for ME, I PROMISE I will make it illegal to build any structure in tornado alley, therefore reducing insurance expenses for everyone!!!

I promise to make it illegal to build structures within 100 miles of a tectonic plate fault, so insurance costs can be greatly reduced by having no losses whene there is an earthquake!

I promise to make it illegal to build structures anywhere near possible lightning strikes, and anywhere near railroad tracks, and......

To address the original question, I don't think the decision needs to be a straight up 'Yes' or 'No' to construction on the island. The question is whether or not the construction can be done in a way as to mitigate the inherent risk of building in that area.

I am positive that building codes could be passed that will assist in mitigating the damage from all but the most powerful of hurricanes. This is similar to the building codes for structures in California that minimize the damage caused by earthquakes.

However, these building codes would add expense to ANY construction project and slow development some. This also runs against the extreme stance of property rights that I see in Texas compared to other states. However, that must be weighed against the people who want to ban development all together in these areas.

In short I believe the building codes along the canals on North Padre Island are inappropriate. The lack of any additional required height on homes above the foundation will lead to MASSIVE losses WHEN a hurricane hits this area. I think the building codes should require a MINIMUM height of the first floor that is well above the current standard and would result in most houses being placed on piers instead of directly on the ground.

If you want to build it, do so but don't ask me to help subsidize your desire to live on an exposed island. Your insurance rates are high but, as you know, given your occupation, they would be much larger if the underwriter had to base his premiums on what the risk is.

So nice politicians like Todd Hunter arrange for the risk to be shared by others who do not have such exposure so you can afford to pay them and enjoy the island life at the expense of others.

Ask yourself if you would live out there if you had to pay premiums based on the actual risk.

And please note that my original post was about building large scale resorts----they are used by people from elsewhere and owned by people from eleswhere. And the rest of us get to pay higher premiums to cover the risk and watch erosion do its magic for their benefit.

[This message has been edited by huisache (edited 9/16/2008 1:58p).]

I'm curious -- what is everyone's thoughts of living and building in the state of Florida? The entire state is a barrier island. Well, peninsula, but in essence, the entire state is at risk, and annually, too.

Just curious...

Seeing as I live in Florida now, I'm against it. I've watched this nice little city of 80,000 when I first moved here 20 years ago, rise to over 160k this past year. Quickly approaching the size of Corpus, but with one quarter of the infrastructure. The natural habitat and animals that are being up-rooted for the sake of progress are making this a miserable place to live now.

racerfink, that sounds like Destin. The place was all-some to visit, but now it sucks as it has been taken over by the super rich building all their 2nd and 3rd beach homes.

I was stationed near there at Eglin AFB for a few years. There's a barrier by the name of Okaloosa Island there. I was always amazed at how anyone would want to live on it, as you can see both the Gulf of Mexico and the Choctawhatchee Bay from just about anywhere on it. It's a virtual guarantee than any named storm will wash out Highway 98.

Trouble is, the area is likely to get even more densely populated, on account of BRAC adding about 3000 assignment slots to Eglin.