Hurricane Ian and its impact on Flordia's migration

[eschaton]

Again guys, the real issue is not the damage per se, it's insurance rates.

If you have a mortgage, you need homeowners insurance, and the industry was already on the precipice of collapse in the state due to earlier storm damage. Rates will jack through the roof, and some homes may become all-but uninsurable. This means only cash buyers will find the "cheap housing" to actually be cheap, which means mostly doubling down on retirees who make poor life choices.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by eschaton

This means only cash buyers will find the "cheap housing" to actually be cheap, which means mostly doubling down on retirees who make poor life choices.

There's a ton of people who think like that, though. "Cheap" often means the lowest front-end price, regardless of taxation, regulation, amenities, asset valuation and growth. So I don't doubt there's a huge reservoir of such retirees.

Also, the build-to-rent SFH market in the Sunbelt is exploding, which is bizarre (IMO), but maybe damaged areas will be full of new build renter SFH. In TX and GA there are now giant communities of new build renter SFHs.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by PhillyRising

I have had friends who moved to Florida who insist that snow storms are worse than Hurricanes.

Seriously.

Yeah that's crazy. That illustrates exactly why I will never move to Florida - there is mass delusion, like that village that danced itself to death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_plague_of_1518

It's like, if you grew up on the Mississippi, Ohio, or any of their tributaries, you are well-aware not only of the large-scale flood controls (the levees, the walls, the reservoir lakes that are often county or state parks), but that large sections of town were often demolished in the early 1900s because they were doomed to keep flooding.

So in one part of the United States, the Army Corps seized flood-prone properties, tore them down, and prohibited any future construction.

But in Florida (and Houston, TX, apparently), go ahead and build crappy slab house after crappy slab house in flood-prone areas.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Most of these people don't give a single flying fucking shit about schools or urbanism or walkability or whatever else it is that you deem to be super-important in life. Above all else, they hate snow, and will live just about anywhere to never have to see it again.

I know all that, and not talking about urbanism. I'm talking about the typical U.S. sprawl life, where weather is irrelevant. It isn't like anyone needs to spend time in the cold (or heat, for that matter) given our sedentary, indoors, auto-oriented lifestyles.

To me, it's weird for people who rarely go outside to make a massive life change based on an outside condition.

And I still don't get the "if they see snow, they have to move" argument, given that very snowy cities like Denver have very high growth rates. Denver gets much more snow than Detroit.

To be fair, though, the Denver demographic probably has nothing to do with the Naples demographic. Former is outdoorsy and young, latter is sedentary and old.

[montréaliste]

Originally Posted by chris08876

I'd like to see a Hurricane named "The Power of Christ Compels You".

"Hurricane The Power of Christ Compels You".

The thought just ran through my head this morning and had to get it out. Sounds much better than Hurricane Ian. Maybe reserve it for a CAT 5.



Yeah its going to be bad enough. The price of used cars is through the roof. A lot of boats destroyed as well.

Lol.

Sounds like this time around they named a major hurricane after the nerdiest sounding male, tape on eyeglasses and pen in shirt pockets type.

No more exclusive female names for major storms, and yet, the given names have either English Spanish origins. I can’t wait for the weather service to tag a Hurricane “Lakeesha”, or “Ontwan”.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by AviationGuy

I spent five hours yesterday chatting online with an elderly lady who was trapped on the second floor of her apartment building in Fort Myers. The entire first floor was flooded, and all the cars in the parking lot were submerged. I looked on Google Earth and Streetview, and saw that her complex was located right on the river in Fort Myers (right by the Edison Bridge). So as the surge came up the river, land areas were immediated flooded. Much of the city was devastated by the surge. So if development occurs in such an area, people are going to suffer, if they survive.

After the lady acknowledged that she wasn't going to die (after the water level eventually decreased), a bunch of us on the forum tried to help her understand how she could get help. That wasn't easy because she wasn't being rational. I have to wonder how many tens of thousands of Floridians are currently in the same shape, while the people up in The Villages are concerned because the wind caused their perfect city to look a little untidy for a day.

Yeah, building a house on the coast or immediately inland isn't rational. Yet we allowed this to happen, en masse, and we allow old people who don't know the difference between save and save as live there.

I suppose that the only "good" thing to come out of this mass-migration of retirees from the Northeast and Great Lakes cities is that it freed up homes and apartments in the "old country" and helped keep them affordable.

My grandfather's brother moved to Florida after the 1977-78 blizzard. I saw him maybe 4 times my entire life. We had no relationship with his family. Maybe he's still alive? Nobody knows. Meanwhile we knew his sister's family quite well because...they still lived in the neighborhood.

There was a huge social cost in the unnecessary break-up of extended families as people turned their backs on their home towns. Kids never knew their grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins, etc. or their friend networks. I think a lot of these people moved with the idea that people would regularly travel to visit them because who wouldn't want to be in Florida?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

And I still don't get the "if they see snow, they have to move" argument, given that very snowy cities like Denver have very high growth rates. Denver gets much more snow than Detroit.

To be fair, though, the Denver demographic probably has nothing to do with the Naples demographic. Former is outdoorsy and young, latter is sedentary and old.

you just answered your own question.

denver has nearby mountains.

aspiring midwest snowboarders moving to denver have very little in common with the aging midwest retirees flocking to gulf coast FL.

[Reverberation]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

But in Florida (and Houston, TX, apparently), go ahead and build crappy slab house after crappy slab house in flood-prone areas.

The code in Houston was revised years ago to where if you build a new house, the finished floor level has to be out of the 500 year flood plain. You can’t even do additions beyond a certain size without lifting the house, so you have started to see mid century ranch houses where the slab has been lifted so there is a slab above pier (in some cases over another slab). Cruise the Meyerland and Bellaire areas on Google Maps and you will see what I mean.

Flood plain maps get revised occasionally though, due to subsidence, which is not a uniquely sunbelt problem.

[cabasse]

Originally Posted by James Bond Agent 007

I've seen areas like that north of Orlando. They're really pretty "meh" as far as hills go. Here's an area I stumbled across in June:
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.8342...7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.8315...7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.8280...7i16384!8i8192
I took a random turn onto that road from US-441 and I was like, "Whoa - hills!"

But Kansas has waaaay more hills and topography than anything you'll find in Florida.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1321...7i10240!8i5120
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1563...7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0661...7i16384!8i8192

Florida is the flattest state.

i think this is more what was being referred to:

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6196...8i8192!5m1!1e4

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.3110...8i8192!5m1!1e4
(from the town i grew up in myself)

i find the bluffs around juno beach kind of interesting, and the hilly neighborhood of roser park in st pete is also beautifully verdant:

https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7611...8i8192!5m1!1e4
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7611...8i6656!5m1!1e4
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7622...8i8192!5m1!1e4

but yeah, florida is flat; it's a unique geology - the florida platform - unlike anywhere else in the US.

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by cabasse

i think this is more what was being referred to:

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6196...8i8192!5m1!1e4

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.3110...8i8192!5m1!1e4
(from the town i grew up in myself)

i find the bluffs around juno beach kind of interesting, and the hilly neighborhood of roser park in st pete is also beautifully verdant:

https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7611...8i8192!5m1!1e4
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7611...8i6656!5m1!1e4
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7622...8i8192!5m1!1e4

but yeah, florida is flat; it's a unique geology - the florida platform - unlike anywhere else in the US.

Jeopardy had a final question on the flattest state a few years ago. Amazingly, none of the 3 contestants got the answer of Florida right.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I know all that, and not talking about urbanism. I'm talking about the typical U.S. sprawl life, where weather is irrelevant. It isn't like anyone needs to spend time in the cold (or heat, for that matter) given our sedentary, indoors, auto-oriented lifestyles.

To me, it's weird for people who rarely go outside to make a massive life change based on an outside condition.

And I still don't get the "if they see snow, they have to move" argument, given that very snowy cities like Denver have very high growth rates. Denver gets much more snow than Detroit.

To be fair, though, the Denver demographic probably has nothing to do with the Naples demographic. Former is outdoorsy and young, latter is sedentary and old.

Your premise is entirely flawed that's the problem, perhaps i'm not as well versed in suburban sprawl life as you, but weather being irrelevant is idiotic at least in suburban Minneapolis and Chicago. In Minnesota a good portion of the population embraces winter. There are literally hundreds and hundreds of ice fishing houses on Lake Minnetonka alone from Jan - Mar, sledding hills are packed, skiing is popular as is snowmobiling. People are outside in the winter. The real issue is your inability to understand not everyone wants to live in Brownstone Brooklyn or some pre war rail town. That's the reality for better or worse. Disagree or be confused all you want, but a large percentage of Americans don't want to live in Cold weather climates.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by Reverberation

The code in Houston was revised years ago to where if you build a new house, the finished floor level has to be out of the 500 year flood plain. You can’t even do additions beyond a certain size without lifting the house, so you have started to see mid century ranch houses where the slab has been lifted so there is a slab above pier (in some cases over another slab). Cruise the Meyerland and Bellaire areas on Google Maps and you will see what I mean.

Flood plain maps get revised occasionally though, due to subsidence, which is not a uniquely sunbelt problem.

That's another problem in itself.....

There's been a lot of work over the last several years to update flood maps since rainfall frequencies and storm intensities are changing. More extreme precipitation leads to "500 year events" becoming "100 year events".

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

I suppose that the only "good" thing to come out of this mass-migration of retirees from the Northeast and Great Lakes cities is that it freed up homes and apartments in the "old country" and helped keep them affordable.

[/I]

Are you implying that cities like Cleveland, Detroit, Philly, Chicago, etc. have remained relatively affordable because retirees moved to Florida after finishing raising their Children in these cities?

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

Are you implying that cities like Cleveland, Detroit, Philly, Chicago, etc. have remained relatively affordable because retirees moved to Florida after finishing raising their Children in these cities?

The metros as a whole? Absolutely. Relatively plentiful supply, relatively low demand.

Inner cities are their own thing, but even they respond to metro-wide housing demand. The worst neighborhoods in Oakland, CA, Boston, MA, or Washington DC are still much, much more expensive than the worst in those cities that you mentioned. Much less likely to have vacant lots too, because land is too valuable even in stone-cold ghetto to abandon entirely.

[Crawford]

Yeah, no doubt the retirees play some role in keeping some of the northern markets more affordable. Especially in cases where the metros have relatively little immigration.

That may play a role in generally greater affordability issues in the Western cities. You don't have half of (say) Salt Lake boomers fleeing somewhere sunny and warm bc Salt Lake is already sunny and warm (and there's no real Western equivalent of Florida).

[Centropolis]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Yeah that's crazy. That illustrates exactly why I will never move to Florida - there is mass delusion, like that village that danced itself to death.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_plague_of_1518

It's like, if you grew up on the Mississippi, Ohio, or any of their tributaries, you are well-aware not only of the large-scale flood controls (the levees, the walls, the reservoir lakes that are often county or state parks), but that large sections of town were often demolished in the early 1900s because they were doomed to keep flooding.

So in one part of the United States, the Army Corps seized flood-prone properties, tore them down, and prohibited any future construction.

But in Florida (and Houston, TX, apparently), go ahead and build crappy slab house after crappy slab house in flood-prone areas.

Very true-you will not see new housing developments in the floodplains of the Mississippi or Missouri river and older housing stock is vanishing. Unless you are a New Urbanist development (DPZs New Town) and are on a small ridge apparently…very dumb because it already flooded. Its like they tried to build housing in the floodplain once and got bit and now insurance is being weird…but Florida gets a pass every year.

https://wewarriors.life/pics/i.ytimg...resdefault.jpg

Commercial and Light Industrial ARE being built at large scale within levees constructed after the Flood of 93 around St. Louis unfortunately.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by eschaton

The metros as a whole? Absolutely. Relatively plentiful supply, relatively low demand.

Inner cities are their own thing, but even they respond to metro-wide housing demand. The worst neighborhoods in Oakland, CA, Boston, MA, or Washington DC are still much, much more expensive than the worst in those cities. Much less likely to have vacant lots too, because land is too valuable even in stone-cold ghetto to abandon entirely.

Metro's sure, I agree. I don't think retirees moving to Florida had much impact on housing costs in the City of Chicago or Cleveland, etc.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

Metro's sure, I agree. I don't think retirees moving to Florida had much impact on housing costs in the City of Chicago or Cleveland, etc.

but city and metro area home values are usually correlated.

in chicagoland's case, they're almost the same.

the ZHVI for chicago city proper is $321,131, while the ZHVI for the entire metro area is $313,828, so not an earth-shattering difference overall.

[eschaton]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

Metro's sure, I agree. I don't think retirees moving to Florida had much impact on housing costs in the City of Chicago or Cleveland, etc.

I completely disagree here. One reason somewhere like Steger, IL is flipping into a black suburb is the old white people are retiring. Many of them move to Florida. This opens up the area to people moving out of the core of the South Side of Chicago, which keeps demand there low.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

but city and metro area home values are usually correlated.

in chicagoland's case, they're almost the same.

the ZHVI for chicago city proper is $321,131, while the ZHVI for the entire metro area is $313,828, so not an earth-shattering difference overall.

Sure, but how many Retirees from Illinois actually come from the city of Chicago? I'd wager not many. Also, Chicago and the rest Chicagoland are separate markets, somebody looking in say LaGrange probably isn't considering anywhere in the city of Chicago.