News Section
Stories from Climate Central's Science Journalists and Content Partners

Top 5 Most Vulnerable U.S. Cities to Hurricanes

Repost This

The 2012 Atlantic Hurricane Season is officially underway, and while Hurricane Katrina has tended to fade from memory, New Orleans isn’t the only major U.S. city at risk, although it remains extremely vulnerable. As Hurricane Irene demonstrated in 2011, weaker hurricanes can also do significant damage in places that are not used to experiencing such storms. Many American coastal cities are essentially sitting ducks to hurricanes, with millions of Americans living at water’s edge, exposed to high winds and flooding.

Some of these communities, like New Orleans and Houston, have experienced powerful storms during the past decade. Others, like Miami and Tampa, have been spared the brunt of landfalling storms during recent hurricane seasons.

TOP 5 MOST
VULNERABLE CITIES


No. 1-  Tampa/St. Petersburg, Fla.
No. 2-  Miami, Fla.
No. 3-  New Orleans, La.
No. 4-  Norfolk/Virginia Beach, Va.
No. 5-  Houston/Galveston, Texas

With that as a background, the following is a look at the Top 5 most vulnerable cities to a landfalling hurricane. We take into account storm frequency and typical storm tracks, as well as the population living at or below the elevation of a potential storm surge. It’s not an all-inclusive or entirely objective list, since pretty much any location along the Gulf and East Coasts are fair game for hurricanes to strike. However, it represents a list of some of the top hurricane targets that keep weather forecasters up at night.

A key issue facing many East Coast cities, in particular, is that sea level rise due to global warming and land elevation changes is already making it easier for damaging storm surge flooding to take place, even during weaker hurricanes. That was also taken into account when preparing this list.

1. Tampa-St. Petersburg, Fla.

The Tampa-St. Petersburg area, on the west coast of Florida, is extremely vulnerable to storm surge flooding, and has been fortunate to escape a direct hit from a strong hurricane for many years. Climate Central calculates the 100-year flood height in this area is 6.5 feet above the high tide line. Using Climate Central’s Surging Seas sea level rise mapping tool — it becomes clear that there are about 125,000 people currently living below this flood level. In St. Petersburg alone, there are more than 45,000 homes that lie below 6 feet in elevation, and would likely be vulnerable to a storm surge of that magnitude or greater.

Click image to enlarge. Radar image of Hurricane Charley as it swept ashore south of Tampa in 2004. Credit: National Hurricane Center.

According to Climate Central’s research, sea level rise is escalating the threat of damaging storm surge flooding in the Tampa area. The odds that a flood exceeding 6.5 feet would occur in Tampa before 2030 are about 14 percent without global warming, but these odds increase to 20 percent with the effects of global warming-related sea level rise factored in.

Tampa is no stranger to hurricanes, including storms that came very close to the city but avoided a worst-case scenario track during the past decade. According to the Hurricane City website, tropical storms and hurricanes have passed within 60 miles of Tampa on 68 occasions since 1871. These included Hurricanes Frances and Jeanne, both of which struck during 2004. However, Tampa has not suffered a direct hit by a strong hurricane since way back in 1921, when a storm surge of 10.5 feet occurred in Tampa Bay.

Hurricane Charley in 2004 was initially forecasted to strike Tampa-St. Petersburg as a Category 2 storm, but shortly before landfall it intensified rapidly into a Category 4 storm, and turned eastward sooner than expected, inflicting its worst damage on the Port Charlotte area, south of Tampa. Charley caused $16 billion in damage.

2. Miami, Fla.

Miami is no stranger to hurricanes, but it has enjoyed a lengthy lucky streak. This year is the 20th anniversary of Hurricane Andrew, a Category 5 storm that flattened southern portions of Miami, including the communities of Homestead and Florida City, in August, 1992. Had that storm tracked about 30 miles farther north, downtown Miami and Miami Beach would have seen the most intense winds and storm surge.

The scene in South Beach, Miami after the Great Miami Hurricane of 1926.Click on image for a larger version. Credit: Florida Memory Project of the Florida Photographic Collection.

Miami residents have not experienced a major hurricane since Andrew, and population growth in coastal areas plus sea level rise is increasing the threat of storm surge-related coastal flooding.

Climate Central computes the 100-year flood height in Miami and Miami Beach is 3 feet above high tide. According to Climate Central’s Surging Seas sea level rise mapping tool, about 56,000 people live below this elevation in Miami Beach, along with 23,000 people in Miami.

According to the Hurricane City website, the center of a tropical storm or hurricane has passed within 60 miles of Miami 71 times since 1871. According to a National Hurricane Center report, a hurricane typically passes within 50 miles of Miami every five to seven years. However, the last major hurricane to make landfall in the Miami area was Hurricane Andrew.

The most infamous storm in Miami’s history is the Great Hurricane of 1926, a Category 4 storm that killed 372 people and injured several thousand. According to the National Weather Service, the Atlantic Ocean advanced all the way across Miami Beach and Biscayne Bay into the city of Miami. The storm caused $167 billion in damage in 2010 dollars, which would put it ahead of Hurricane Katrina as the costliest hurricane in U.S. history.

Miami was also struck by intense hurricanes in 1945, 1947, and 1964.

3. New Orleans, La.

Click image to enlarge. Estimated return period in years for hurricanes passing within 50 nautical miles of various locations on the U.S. Coast. Credit: National Hurricane Center.

After New Orleans was devastated by Hurricane Katrina eight years ago, one might think that the city had paid its hurricane dues, and would not see a storm for a long time to come. Unfortunately, Mother Nature doesn’t work that way, as several close calls with storms such as Gustav and Ike have since demonstrated. On average, the Weather Service says that a hurricane should make landfall within 50 miles of New Orleans about once every seven to 11 years.

Despite upgrades to its flood protection systems since Katrina, low-lying New Orleans remains highly vulnerable to hurricanes, particularly major storms of Category 3 or greater. The continued loss of wetlands in southeastern Louisiana is providing the Big Easy with less protection from a storm surge with each passing year.

About half of New Orleans lies below sea level, and 340,000 people — nearly 100 percent of New Orleanians — live below the 100-year reference flood of 9.2 feet above high tide.

4. Norfolk/Virginia Beach, Va.

Norfolk and nearby Virginia Beach are vulnerable to hurricanes that move up the Eastern Seaboard, and were affected by Hurricane Irene in 2011. While these communities tend to miss the most intense storms, they are home to expensive infrastructure that is vulnerable to storm surge-related impacts, such as the U.S. Navy’s largest base, which is located on low-lying land in Norfolk.

According to Climate Central’s research, Virginia’s Chesapeake area has one of the fastest rates of sea level rise in the country, due to a combination of manmade global warming and the natural sinking of land in this region.

Area of Norfolk, Va. like will likely flood from 5 feet of sea level rise. Credit: Surging Seas.

In Norfolk, Climate Central calculates that about 19,000 people live below the 100-year flood level of 5.4 feet above high tide. Sea level rise is dramatically raising the odds of storm surge flooding at or above this height. This means that future hurricanes are likely to have greater storm surge-related impacts than past storms.

In Virginia Beach, the 100-year flood level is 4.8 feet above high tide, and there are about 40,000 people who live below this elevation. Here too, sea level rise is boosting the odds that such a flood will be exceeded by 2030.

Since 1871, the centers of tropical storms or hurricanes have passed within 60 miles of Norfolk on 57 occasions. This list includes noteworthy storms such as Hurricane Floyd in 1999, and Hurricane Isabel in 2003.

According to the National Weather Service, the highest recorded wind speed at Norfolk Airport was recorded during Hurricane Hazel in 1954, when the wind gusted to 100 mph. Nearby Hampton, Va., recorded a wind gust of 130 mph during the same storm.

Hurricanes come close enough to produce hurricane force winds within 50 miles of the Norfolk/Virginia Beach area about once ever seven to 11 years. With warmer than average water temperatures off the East Coast right now, perhaps this year will see another Virginia storm?

5. Houston/Galveston, Texas

The sprawling Houston metropolitan area, with a population of 6.1 million and vital oil and gas infrastructure located on low-lying land, is vulnerable to hurricanes that traverse the Gulf of Mexico. Hurricane Ike heavily impacted Houston and the nearby city of Galveston in 2008, causing $27.8 billion in damage, and killing 20. The communities of Crystal Beach, Gilchrest, and High Island experienced “near total destruction of property,” according to the Weather Service.

One of the few homes left standing after Ike's storm surge swept across the Texas community of Gilchrest. Click on image for a larger version. Credit: FEMA.

Typically, hurricanes will strike the Texas coast once every nine to 16 years, while tropical storms are more common than that. While Ike was a powerful Category 2 storm at landfall, it was a large storm, and it drove a storm surge onshore that was more typical of a Category 4 storm.

Parts of Jefferson County, Texas, and Cameron Parish, La., experienced a storm surge of up to 17 feet. The highest storm surge as measured by a National Ocean Service tide gauge was 12.79 feet at Sabine Pass North, Texas, as Ike was coming ashore at Galveston. A report from the National Hurricane Center states that the highest storm surge occurred on the Bolivar Peninsula and parts of Chambers County, Texas, and was between 15 to 20 feet.

Galveston was the site of America’s worst-recorded hurricane disaster, when a storm struck in 1900, sending a massive storm surge across the island, killing at least 8,000 people. Despite the continued risk of coastal flooding in that community, about 40,000 people live below the 100-year flood level there.

Tropical storms and hurricanes in Texas are also known for being heavy rain producers as well as wind and storm surge threats. This can be beneficial, since tropical weather systems can alleviate drought conditions, but too much rain can be devastating. For example, Tropical Storm Allison in 2001 dumped as much as 35 to 40 inches of rain on southeast Texas, killing 41 people and causing $9 billion in damage. 

Comments

By Mike MacCracken (Bethesda MD 20814)
on June 6th, 2012

In calculating storm surge height, I assume this is referring to mean height and that (wind-whipped) waves are on top of that, so water can get pushed in much further and so make the situation even worse, especially as the ability of the water to be taken from the regions by storm sewers becomes much reduced, so slowing the removal rate of water. Is this correct, and what more damage (or at least risk of damage) would this involve?

Reply to this comment

By Andrew
on June 6th, 2012

Mike,

Yes, I believe you are correct re: storm surge height. Each storm would be different in terms of impacts, depending on timing/direction/tide level, etc. so it’s hard to say how much more or less damage that each would involve.

Reply to this comment

By Jeb (Hollywood, Florida 33019)
on June 6th, 2012

So Republicans scheduled their convention in the city most vulnerable to hurricanes during the week that just happens to be at the very peak of hurricane season.  That’s horrendously lousy planning, and they want to run the country?

Reply to this comment

By Roy Leep (Tampa fl 35479)
on June 9th, 2012

I hope Sarasota takes a hit from a storm
It would be good for the construction business

Reply to this comment

By David Lewis (Seattle)
on June 29th, 2012

Roy Leep’s comment that he hopes Sarasota takes a storm hit as it would be “good for the construction business” illustrates how insane US federal disaster policy has been.  In their book “The Rising Sea”, Orrin PIlkey and Rob Young explain that because of the Stafford Act which mandates federal disaster funds to rebuild what is lost no matter what the chances of a repeat are:

“hurricanes have become urban renewal programs.  The replacement houses become larger and even more costly to replace again in future.  The problem is compounded when even people whose rental investment houses were destroyed are considered victims;  maybe people who insist on building adjacent to eroding shorelines facing the open ocean should be considered fools not victims”. 

Now that climate change threatens hurricanes of greater intensity FEMA Director Fugate is calling for a change to the attitude: 

“We cannot afford to continue to respond to disasters and deal with the consequences under the current model,” said Fugate. “Risk that is not mitigated, that is not considered in return on investment calculations, will often set up false economies. We will reach a point where we can no longer subsidize this.”

Reply to this comment

By Santiago Burgos (New Orleans, LA 70125)
on September 8th, 2012

Two years ago I chose to live in New Orleans and head a small community development organization in the deepest part of the bowl: the Broadmoor neighborhood. It’s been an awe-inspiring experience joining the leaders, out of the box thinkers, young talent and regular residents, who made this neighborhood’s recovery a text book story now used overseas to assist in disaster recovery efforts. Broadmoor has been racially and economically mixed since the 1930s, is historic and has survived many man-made disasters from Jim Crowe to the post Katrina federal floods and a local government challenge to comeback on its own after that.

I hope I misread Mr. Lewis (Seattle) reaction to those who continue to live in places like New Orleans. Otherwise while understandable, the reaction entirely misses the point. Calling those people “fools” is like being inside a large boat with a huge leaking cavity on one side and pointing the finger laughing at them because they happen to be closest to the hole letting the water in. Eventually, we’ll all be sinking if we do that.

People who chose to live in places like these do it I’ve learned, because of deep cultural, social, even spiritual reasons and sometimes economic too. And for example, anyone who has lived in New Orleans will admit like it or not that this is a very unique place you will not find anywhere else. If you love it you will become attached to it. In fact, people in NOLA have one the highest levels of attachment found in any city having lived/ stayed in this town for multiple generations at a rate of nearly 80% of households.

But whether we get that or not we could also argue that we are all in denial because it’s the human thing to do. While a sheet of ice one kilometer thick and billions of tons slowly slips into the ocean, we all go about our business (in Seattle too)acting like at the last minute we could send Superman (or the US Army) to simply rope the glacier back into place and save the day.

So we can conclude we all live in a planet of fools or use the new normal as an opportunity to learn how to adapt, become more resilient, better able to prevent and recover. I like the latter more. Maybe we can learn about building smaller, storm resistant, highly energy efficient housing and about flood mitigation, floating cities and how they’ve survived. I have to agree that recovery as in getting back to the old ways isn’t going to cut it but pointing fingers only helps if we just need to vent more hot air.

Reply to this comment

By ONeill (Virginia Beach, VA)
on October 26th, 2012

“With warmer than average water temperatures off the East Coast right now, perhaps this year will see another Virginia storm?”

It seems like you were right.

Reply to this comment

By Pat (Boston, MA)
on February 10th, 2013

Toni neighborhoods or natural disasters waiting to happen?

Americans, nor anyone else in the world has been all that smart about where they build, and why.

With all of our new ability to track climate, and storms, etc, people may come to the realization that where people build matters.

Flood plain a are constant sources of hazard prone storms, and while they may be great places to visit, or great places to work, most people would not want to live there - or incur the costs of maintence and rebuilding in those areas.

How long Americans are expected to subsidize these repetitive hazards is anyone’s guess, but hazard-aware taxpayers are increasingly resistant to pay for the subsidies of zoning policies that ignore realities, so a mere few can enjoy the privileges of the views which remain exclusively their’s, while others pay the bill.

Reply to this comment

By Bob
on May 8th, 2013

Hi


Reply to this comment

By Don (Minnesota )
on April 22nd, 2014

Way back in the early 1970s, National Lampoon did a satire on a civilization known as the “Dolts”.  This is a quote from NL edition no. 12:

“The Dolts, By Chris Rush”

An “anthropological report” on the Dolts, an early European people whose culture was based entirely on stupidity.”

In a nutshell, the fault of the Dolt civilization, other than being based entirely on “stupidity”, was their desire to live on the sides of active volcanoes in paper mache’ huts.  A mistake, despite their deep rooted ties to their “cultural roots” and it’s affinity for combining paper mache’ structures with locations known for prodigiously producing infallible ignition sources. 

Take what you want from this.  No matter how we look at it, building and living in known hazardous areas such as along flood plains, hurricane prone low lying coastal areas, known locations vulnerable to landslides, sink hole areas etc.  is at the very least unwise and foolhardy.  No amount of “cultural ties” is worth the risk, unless of course that culture holds extreme value in discomfort, fear/terror, and endless worry. 

Are moments of glee worth a lifetimes of uncertainty and foreboding?  Should those with the wisdom to choose not to live that way be required to perpetually subsidize those that do?

Reply to this comment

Name (required):
Email (required):
City/State/Zip:
Enter the word "climate" in the box below:

[+] View our comment guidelines.

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment will not appear until reviewed by Climate Central staff. Thank you for your patience.