Dune

[AZRedhawk44]

http://www.app.com/article/20130925/NJNEWS/309250071?odyssey=mod|mostcom

No, not the sci fi classic.

Though this does star Lardo Christiean, if you want space stuff.

About a 1000 property owners on NJ's beach shore don't want to allow dunes to be built in front of their houses, because the 22 foot tall walls will block their ocean view and destroy market value of their homes.

The anarcho-capitalist in me agrees with the home owners.

And frankly the conservative Statist in me acknowledges the existence of Eminent Domain and that using it to obtain an easement should be fool's play in a part of the country that set the Kelo decision... civic flood infrastructure is simple to justify when compared to speculative increases in commercial tax base.

I think this proves that Kelo was about being well connected, and well connected people don't get Eminent Domained.  They are the ED-ers.  

These beach front home owners are a group of well connected people and aren't likely to face Eminent Domain because of that.  Rather than the merits of the situation.

(I still say Eminent Domain is property abuse no matter what, but it's ridiculous to me that this problem exists with a simple law like that on the books, no matter how reprehensible.)

[MechAg94]

Why would it hurt property values if they were still the closest houses to the beach? 

Last time I stayed in Galveston (before Ike) there was a dune in front of a bunch of houses.  The Houses were all 3 stories high with decks on the 3rd floor with a view of the ocean. 

[vaskidmark]

If you don't want a dune that's fine by me.  But do not expect to get a federal/state handout to rebuild after the next weather-made disaster destroys your oceanfront property.

If I'm going to have to pay for someone else's stupidity I want even the slightest chance to mitigate the cost to me.  If that means dumping a wall of sand then so be it - although I would prefer if they used those cast concrete tetrapods http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrapod_(structure) just because they are so ugly.

stay safe.

[dogmush]

How many tax dollars did that town receive when Normal old Cat 3 hurricane Sandy hit?  Yeah, STFU and enjoy your dunes.

[HankB]

If you don't want a dune that's fine by me.  But do not expect to get a federal/state handout to rebuild after the next weather-made disaster destroys your oceanfront property.

If I'm going to have to pay for someone else's stupidity I want even the slightest chance to mitigate the cost to me . . .

I'd do it by assigning a value to the property in the flood zone, and freezing forever the amount of coverage. So if an existing $200,000 house in a flood plain gets destroyed, the owner gets $200,000 in Federal flood insurance . . . and that property can never get taxpayer-subsidized flood insurance again. Ever.

If only $100,000 in damage is done, the owner gets $100,000 . . . and the amount of Federal insurance would go down to $100k and not a penny more.

Pay it off once, and once only. Build there again - and insurance is up to you.

Oh, and this is ONLY for existing properties; no NEW construction in flood plains would be insured under any Federal program.

[AZRedhawk44]

I'm in complete agreement.  Building a house facing the ocean in a location known to get 130mph winds every X years guarantees that within X years your home will be severely damaged or destroyed.  Buyer beware, don't be a dum bass and expect free money from government, etc.  Insurance premiums should pretty much be high enough that X years of premiums pays to rebuild the house.

But I'm astounded at the lack of application of Eminent Domain here.  One of the situations that actually justifies its existence.  And it's not used.

[BlueStarLizzard]

What about effects to the propertys behind the first line?

So, if I have a house that is not beach adjacent, but accross the road from the house that is and my house is also affected by the dunes, do I not get a say?
So, I'd have to get extra insurance for the lack of dunes and if it's .gov subsidised, then they get to pay every time my house got wiped out because dude with a veiw had to keep his veiw?

Plus, the .gov has to rebuild the roads and other infrastructure that gets torn up, which is tax payers dollers.

If the .gov is subsidising all this insurance and it affects more then the idiots with a veiw, then I say it's a public desision, not a private one.


Build the fracking dunes and STFU.

[Sergeant Bob]

But I'm astounded at the lack of application of Eminent Domain here.  One of the situations that actually justifies its existence.  And it's not used.

I think in some places, the actual property the "beach" resides on is under control of the govt anyway, so it's possible
they wouldn't need to use eminent domain (which I agree in this case is justified) to alter the beach.

What about effects to the propertys behind the first line?

So, if I have a house that is not beach adjacent, but accross the road from the house that is and my house is also affected by the dunes, do I not get a say?
So, I'd have to get extra insurance for the lack of dunes and if it's .gov subsidised, then they get to pay every time my house got wiped out because dude with a veiw had to keep his veiw?

Plus, the .gov has to rebuild the roads and other infrastructure that gets torn up, which is tax payers dollers.

If the .gov taxpayer is subsidising all this insurance and it affects more then the idiots with a veiw, then I say it's a public desision, not a private one.


Build the fracking dunes and STFU.

Made one little repair to your post.

Good points all. There is a lot more at stake than just someone's pretty view. It sucks to be them (though they seem perfectly happy to have their property destroyed and rebuilt at taxpayer's expense).

[BlueStarLizzard]

Bob,

They own beach front propertys and just got there houses rebuilt for "free" (well, they got a signifegant discount, anyway).

It does not suck to be them at all.

[Sergeant Bob]

Bob,

They own beach front propertys and just got there houses rebuilt for "free" (well, they got a signifegant discount, anyway).

It does not suck to be them at all.

I should have said "It will suck to be them".