Seeker Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Lorriane Clenehan woke Saturday to find the surf pounding at the door of her Boundary Bay home. "The waves were coming about 30 or 40 feet high over the seawall, halfway down my yard, which is like 200 feet deep, and then going over the hedge and into the farmer's field next door," she said Let's see, waves 40 feet high plus yard 200 feet deep equals 240 foot high waves!! 100 km/hr winds in BC is the storm of the century but in eastern Canada it happens every second Tuesday. Something like this would not even make it into the morning rotation down at my local Tim's here in NS. Oh well, at least they didn't have to call in the military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFL Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 seeker; There are some differences in topograpy etc. there and the homes mentioned are so close to sea level that they cannot qualify for flood insurance. Go on out and check it out. Anyway I will be thinking of you proud, tough, independent eastern Canadian people again as I do every year at this time while filling out my income tax return. RFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaEH Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 You can't get flood insurance if you live next to the ocean but you can if you live on the top of Grouse Mountain. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted February 7, 2006 Author Share Posted February 7, 2006 Anyway I will be thinking of you proud, tough, independent eastern Canadian people again as I do every year at this time while filling out my income tax return. RFL: Yup, you got me on the tax issue for sure. I do feel a certain smugness however over the price I paid for my waterfront home that's 30 minutes from the airport, 30 minutes from downtown Halifax and only 10 minutes from a beautiful ocean beach - couldn't afford anything like this in BC and southern AB doesn't even have any waterfront aside from the Bow "River." Overall, the extra tax I pay doesn't bother me too much considering the upside. seeker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted February 7, 2006 Author Share Posted February 7, 2006 You can't get flood insurance if you live next to the ocean but you can if you live on the top of Grouse Mountain. Go figure. Here's some advice; never buy a house where you feel you might need flood insurance. Whether or not you can buy the insurance isn't the question you should answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFL Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 seeker; You do live in a beautiful part of the world. Enjoy it. I was referring to the $2500-$2700 per person subsidy sent each year to eastern Canadians by ON, AB, BC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fido Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 .....I was referring to the $2500-$5000 per person subsidy sent each year to eastern Canadians by ON, AB, BC. BC is only at break-even for transfers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rattler Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 BC is only at break-even for transfers. Yes you have to remember that they had two consecutive terms of NDP Governments...... It takes awhile to recover........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted February 7, 2006 Author Share Posted February 7, 2006 seeker; You do live in a beautiful part of the world. Enjoy it. I was referring to the $2500-$5000 per person subsidy sent each year to eastern Canadians by ON, AB, BC. RFL: I completely missed your point, sorry. I do find what you're saying now to be puzzling though. You're upset because you will in a province that pays equalization? Is that right? Where do you live? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innuendo Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 It would appear that the taxpayers of BC are going to be paying "Compensation" to the people who sustained damage from this weather. According to today's paper, one of the measures taken each year is to create a sand berm for protection during winter, the berm is flattened later to restore views. Seems there is awareness of a potential problem but the approach sounds like a "keep your fingers crossed" solution. It would appear that the insurers also see a problem. Am I being callous in thinking that insurance for your private property should be your own responsibility and if you can't get coverage you either should not build there or you do something about the risk level, proper breakwater perhaps. If you choose to put your money into something that the insurance companies are not willing to cover then that should be your call. I have a problem understanding why your fellow taxpayer should be paying for your actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted February 7, 2006 Author Share Posted February 7, 2006 Innuendo: I agree. If you can't buy insurance for something it's cause to consider why. I suspect that in this case the taxpayer is on the hook because building permits were granted to build in those locations that are now likely to flood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innuendo Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 I suspect that in this case the taxpayer is on the hook because building permits were granted to build in those locations that are now likely to flood. I believe that what you say is being debated about the houses in North Vancouver that are considered at risk after the slide that caused loss of life. It may end up being a wake up call about tests before building permits are granted and who could/should be liable if it is later decided that the permit should not have been issued. (There is a big question about this in the North Van case, previous documentation) The insurance companies are not stupid, if they are not willing to cover at normal rates they probably have a good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted February 7, 2006 Author Share Posted February 7, 2006 Innuendo: It's hard to out-smart an actuary. As for who's liable, I'd say the municipality is liable. When I have a building permit approved it's a statement that the planned construction will be safe and meet the appropriate standards. If the house gets washed away in a landslide it obvously wasn't safe and didn't meet the standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo32a Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 . Am I being callous in thinking that insurance for your private property should be your own responsibility and if you can't get coverage you either should not build there or you do something about the risk level, proper breakwater perhaps. If you choose to put your money into something that the insurance companies are not willing to cover then that should be your call. I have a problem understanding why your fellow taxpayer should be paying for your actions. I totally agree. When these folks sell their homes for $2-3 million, (average price of waterfront), will they be sharing their windfall gains with the taxpayer. Not likely!!!! If you choose to build in an area like this you are doing it because; a. you really like the property and are willing to assume the inherent risks involved, or b. you realize that you are going to make a tremendous amount of money on waterfront property Either case it is YOU that should shoulder the costs - not the taxpayer, unless you are willing to pay back the funds to the government when you sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFL Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 mo32a; Homes in Beach Grove do not sell for anything near that price. What is your position on most of the homes in Winnipeg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo32a Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 mo32a; Homes in Beach Grove do not sell for anything near that price. What is your position on most of the homes in Winnipeg? They are all over 1 million and will do nothing but appreciate in coming years. Nobody in YWG is going to enjoy dramatic increases in their housing prices, and if anything they may suffer a decline. Not the same situation at all. If you can't get flood insurance there is a reason for that - accept the risk or don't buy there. If you can get flood insurance and choose not to - same storey. People need to take personal responsibility for their choices and quit looking to the government to bail them out for every bad decision they make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.