T1B

That's a lot of fucking dirt. Might take a while to clean it up.

I had a little slide on my front bank this past winter, but it wasn't nearly that big.

Rochester is working on the rainiest spring in the history of weather measurements in this area. That combined with some International Water Management fuckery is creating scenes like this.

I think I'd avoid having a place right on the shore of the ocean/lake/river. We live at a point 8 feet above sea level and about 2 miles away. If there was a 10 foot storm surge in the Gulf (of Mexico) I 'd have 2 feet of it in my house. I carry flood insurance just in case.

Flood insurance is cheap. I have zero sympathy for those that choose not to carry it.

Left Seater wrote:Flood insurance is cheap. I have zero sympathy for those that choose not to carry it.

Doesn't affect me personally, but don't you have to live in a flood zone to even buy flood insurance?

It would be pretty stupid to buy flood insurance if you don't live in a flood zone.

Goober McTuber wrote:

Left Seater wrote:Flood insurance is cheap. I have zero sympathy for those that choose not to carry it.

Doesn't affect me personally, but don't you have to live in a flood zone to even buy flood insurance?

Negative. If you live in a higher flood prone area flood insurance is more expensive but anyone can buy it. Flood insurance covers you from almost all rising water. So picture a person who lives 2/3rds of a way up a hill. The water main breaks a few houses up the hill and the water flows down the street and into your house. Flood insurance is what will pay for these repairs, not your standard homeowners policy.

Lefty, I believe your example is bullshit. A "flood" is when a body of water rises to immerse your property. A water main bursting a few houses away I would think, would be covered by the water company's insurance. Or at least it should.

I do not carry flood insurance. I am pretty close to the top of a hill. I am on a sloped lot. The soil is sandy and drains very well. If I get flood damage, most of my town and probably 90% of the population of Ct is underwater and we have bigger problems.

Mikey wrote:It would be pretty stupid to buy flood insurance if you don't live in a flood zone.

Tell that to the owners of the tens of thousands of homes that flooded in Louisiana last year. Most were not in flood zones.

Python wrote: Tell that to the owners of the tens of thousands of homes that flooded in Louisiana last year. Most were not in flood zones.

Wait, what?

The highest "mountain"in Louisiana is about 500 feet. I think it's quite possible that Louisianans have a poor understanding of what a "flood zone" is, cementing their reputation of "dumbest fucking state in the country."

Let a guy who lives where it floods occasionally help you guys out -- It's flat. I flooded. Ergo (Latin), it's a fucking flood zone.

Dins, we go way back but I have no problem telling you this. Just shut the fuck up on this one. Seriously.

It happened just like someone earlier posted. "If I flood, the whole city will flood. It'll never happen."

Then it did. Town after town. Nobody in a flood zone but 20+ inches of rain in a couple of days will do that.

http://maps.lsuagcenter.com/floodmaps/?FIPS=22015

Enter any Parish to see where the "flood zones" are. Believe me, there's lots.

You obviously have no idea how widespread the devastation was. Do you even know what areas of the state flooded? No, you don't. Entire towns are still gone. Parish after parish. Flood zone, no flood zone...didn't matter. It was an historic flood that was unimaginable in scale.

Not sure of the point of the link. That there have been bigger floods?

Mikey wrote:It would be pretty stupid to buy flood insurance if you don't live in a flood zone.

Really?

As Dins said, LA is pretty fukking flat, therefore a large chunk of the state, while not technically in a 100 year flood plain, or whatever it is they call them. IIRC, there are different levels based on time. 10 year, 50 year, 100 year,etc..... Bottom line, if you are remotely close to a flood plain, it wouldn't hurt to buy it. I still won't because I seriously doubt even a flood like the one that douched LA would get within 100 ft or so, elevation-wise to me.

Goober McTuber wrote:

Mikey wrote:It would be pretty stupid to buy flood insurance if you don't live in a flood zone.

Really?

Did you actually read that? Basically an ad for flood insurance that says you don't have to live in a flood zone to buy flood insurance. No shit. Dumbass.

I've got earthquake insurance. You don't have to live in California to buy earthquake insurance. Do you have yours yet?

Mikey wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Mikey wrote:It would be pretty stupid to buy flood insurance if you don't live in a flood zone.

Really?

Did you actually read that? Basically an ad for flood insurance that says you don't have to live in a flood zone to buy flood insurance. No shit. Dumbass.

I've got earthquake insurance. You don't have to live in California to buy earthquake insurance. Do you have yours yet?

But Mikey, it is on the interwebs, are you saying that was fake news?

FYI, if you have EQ insurance is it covering your pool? Wood frame structures if built to code in SD County should withstand what we may see here, SA is out in the desert. Put a lightly to no reinforced concrete shell in a hole in the ground and fill with water for raccoons to frolic in, could be a containment issue.

Mikey wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:

Mikey wrote:It would be pretty stupid to buy flood insurance if you don't live in a flood zone.

Really?

Did you actually read that?

Yes, I did. I read about floods happening outside of flood plains.

Here, read this one.

Floods can happen anywhere--More than 20 percent of flood claims come from properties outside the high risk flood zone.

Do you have fatass insurance? Might be time to file a claim.

This is the closest water to my backyard. It is about 50 ft below my backyard. In 1974 somebody with the county pure water project accidentally emptied the contents of about 5 miles of the Erie Canal into the creek. The water got about halfway up the bluff. I don't think I'm going to be worrying about floods anytime soon.

Don't you own a rake?

Goober McTuber wrote:Don't you own a rake?

I have a leaf blower too. You're looking at where the leafs get blown. Not going to be raking those woods anytime soon.

The kids and I are planning a trip out Nacimiento Furgeson Rd to a spot just north of the closure. Will PET if we get any good shots.

atmdad wrote:
FYI, if you have EQ insurance is it covering your pool? Wood frame structures if built to code in SD County should withstand what we may see here, SA is out in the desert. Put a lightly to no reinforced concrete shell in a hole in the ground and fill with water for raccoons to frolic in, could be a containment issue.

EQ insurance is pretty cheap and carries a high deductible, pretty much meant to cover total loss of the structure, I think. I'm not actually sure if it covers the pool...will need to check on that.

You're right though, that the normal one or two story wood frame slab on grade homes are pretty resistant to quakes, unless of course the fault runs through your living room. Any kind of masonry or high rise is a lot more susceptible, and especially those old apartment buildings with ground floor parking that collapsed in the Northridge quake. My mom, who was living in Cupertino, sustained some damage in the Loma Prieta quake but it was mostly stuff falling over an off shelves.

I'm not a civil engineer, but I'd think that an in-ground pool would actually be less susceptible to shaking than an above ground structure considering moment if inertia and all that stuff. That being said, our pool has a lot of extra reinforcement due to the fact that it was built at the bottom of a slope. I think they called it something like "double curtain" because it has to function as a retaining wall for the slope.

schmick wrote:
The Santa Ana Mountain Range is between him in Fallbrook and the Pacific Ocean. There are peaks in that range over 5600 feet.... That would require one hell of a storm surge

That range is north of us. There are a few hills between us and the coast but nothing like 5600 feet. We're almost in the San Luis Rey River valley. At about 15 miles inland 600 feet elevation no mere "storm surge" will ever get anywhere close to us.

So, I wonder who owns this new 13 acre chunk of oceanfront property?

Big Sur coast has grown 13 acres from new landslide
Scientists shoot photos from airplane and measure growth

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/31/b ... landslide/

Mikey wrote:

atmdad wrote:
FYI, if you have EQ insurance is it covering your pool? Wood frame structures if built to code in SD County should withstand what we may see here, SA is out in the desert. Put a lightly to no reinforced concrete shell in a hole in the ground and fill with water for raccoons to frolic in, could be a containment issue.

EQ insurance is pretty cheap and carries a high deductible, pretty much meant to cover total loss of the structure, I think. I'm not actually sure if it covers the pool...will need to check on that.

You're right though, that the normal one or two story wood frame slab on grade homes are pretty resistant to quakes, unless of course the fault runs through your living room. Any kind of masonry or high rise is a lot more susceptible, and especially those old apartment buildings with ground floor parking that collapsed in the Northridge quake. My mom, who was living in Cupertino, sustained some damage in the Loma Prieta quake but it was mostly stuff falling over an off shelves.

I'm not a civil engineer, but I'd think that an in-ground pool would actually be less susceptible to shaking than an above ground structure considering moment if inertia and all that stuff. That being said, our pool has a lot of extra reinforcement due to the fact that it was built at the bottom of a slope. I think they called it something like "double curtain" because it has to function as a retaining wall for the slope.

Above ground pools are sheet metal. They are held to their shape by thousands of gallons of water. I suspect one could hold up to a good deal of jiggling. They would wobble quite a bit, but that's it. An inground is typically made of some sort of concrete type product. It is strong, but not terribly flexible. I suspect that while it would hold its shape more or less, it would likely start leaking like a sieve and require a good bit of work after a shake. Perhaps you left coasters account for this and use something more flexible like fiberglass or even sheetmetal with a vinyl liner. When I was a kid, my grandfather had such a pool.

So, has Donald Fagen gone back to Annandale yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mikey wrote:So, I wonder who owns this new 13 acre chunk of oceanfront property?

Big Sur coast has grown 13 acres from new landslide
Scientists shoot photos from airplane and measure growth

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/31/b ... landslide/

According to one of the commenters, it is part of Los Padres National Forest.