Saturday was the 20th anniversary of the Loma Prieta earthquake. For non-locals, that was the one that damaged the Bay Bridge and halted the 1989 World Series. The epicenter of the quake was in the Forest of Nisene Marks, just a few miles from where I now live. Is it irresponsible to choose to live so close to known fault lines? Maybe. According to the US Geographical Survey, there have already been 24 shakes today in California, although none of them registered over 3 on the Richter scale (and I didn't feel any of them). It's definitely costly. California taxpayers have footed the bill for billions of dollars of seismic retrofits on bridges alone, with the ongoing construction on the Bay Bridge described as the the largest public works contract in California's history.Interestingly, more than 80% of Bay Area residents can't identify the most active fault near where they live. (It's the Hayward Fault, not as many would guess, the San Andreas fault).
Perhaps ignorance of natural disasters is bliss. I had foolishly believed that earthquakes were the major concern in terms of local natural hazards. I had overlooked forest fires (one was burning up in Bonny Doon when I arrived, and destroyed over 7000 acres and 13 structures, costing nearly $1 billion to contain, and required some 1500 firefighters before it was contained.) Typhoons had not occurred to me, yet we experienced the remains of a Japanese typhoon just last Tuesday, when nearly 10 inches of rain were dumped on us in a 48 hour period! Then Eric casually mentioned that California is also at risk of tsunamis (11 died in 1964 in Crescent City when a tsunami last hit the Golden State). And we shouldn't forget debris flows, a massively destructive force of nature particularly of concern in the Los Angeles area grippingly described in John McPhee's The Control of Nature.
It's lucky that I am not paranoid, or I might by now have jumped on the first flight I could find back to New York (great deals on Virgin America today, by the way, folks - $99 cross continent!). And you may be wondering what all this has to do with my job search (will I turn down a job based on its proximity to the Hayward fault, perhaps?)
Instead, all these factors are playing in to our search for a house. In recent weeks, we've looked at properties with fabulous views (but located on a hill with trees above which might decide to come and visit in a serious rainstorm), with serious acreage (but located in the flammable woods up in the mountains) and close to the ocean (we couldn't afford that one, at a mere $3.6 million, but it was fun checking out how the other half lives). Accommodating my desire for some kind of house wow factor (like a great view or interesting architecture), and the pragmatic requirement of a flat lot is proving challenging, but keeps us busy at weekends, motoring around the county.
And I have a newfound respect for natural disaster insurance!
My theory is that the "Big One," when it comes, will be in New York, not Los Angeles or San Francisco. The area had a few major earthquakes before it was heavily built up, and one now would likely be much more devastating than on the West Coast, since local residents - and buildings - are not prepared for it.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.earth.columbia.edu/articles/view/2235