Did you see actor Brad Pitt interviewed by Larry King last night about his project to rebuild homes in the most vulnerable area of flood-prone New Orleans? While his heart is in the right place, is his head on straight, and should insurers support his noble efforts? Or is he being hopelessly naive and misguided?
While I admire the initiative Mr. Pitt is taking to use his celebrity as well as his own money to spur redevelopment of the devastated Lower Ninth Ward–which might be flooded again should the city's leaky levees fail when the next hurricane inevitably hits–I couldn't help but wonder about the wisdom of putting homes back in that residential bowl. It sounded like a disaster just waiting to happen…again!
But then Mr. Pitt made a very interesting point when Larry King raised that very problem. He said that If you cannot build in the Ninth Ward because the area might someday be swept away again by floodwaters, by that same logic, we shouldn't permit another home, store or office to be built in earthquake-prone San Francisco…or in hurricane-exposed Miami…or anywhere along Tornado Alley in the Midwest.
Whether that is an argument for green-lighting new construction in the most flood-prone areas of New Orleans, or for cutting back on construction in San Francisco, Miami and all other catastrophe-exposed locations is open to debate.
To his credit, Mr. Pitt is not advocating putting up just any old structure in the Ninth Ward. He actually held a design contest to determine the most affordable, practical and safety-conscious reconstruction possible. (For more details on his program, "Make It Right," go to coverage in The New York Times by clicking here.)
Meanwhile, others are not only trying to convince people to rebuild in The Big Easy, but to cover those who do. Back in October, there was a seminar held to drum up insurance industry support here in New York–sort of a road show put on by construction firms and safety experts, hosted by the Inland Marine Underwriters Association Construction Committee.
As reported by our own Phil Gusman, the speakers "presented arguments designed to convince insurance company representatives in the audience that they should not shy away from underwriting New Orleans construction," with the inability to secure coverage reportedly holding back the city's renewal effort. Steps to better secure the area from catastrophe damage were presented. (You can read the entire story by clicking here.)
Is this enough to make it worth the effort and risk to rebuild? Should insurers be more supportive, or is covering New Orleans a sucker's bet? How about Mr. Pitt's point that if you're going to allow expensive construction in cat zones like San Francisco or Miami, why not New Orleans?
What do you folks think???
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.