Chelsea under water? Beachfront property on 14th Street? Coney Island washed away? Seems like a bad Charlton Heston movie, but actually it is not an unlikely scenario.

Recent weather reports have indicated that not only is this year’s El Niño pattern disappearing but a La Niña could be forming to replace it in the Pacific. If that occurs, we can once again expect a year of intense hurricane activity. Although there are many factors that contribute to create active hurricane seasons, La Niña seems to be a key ingredient. Coupled with warmer ocean temperatures from global warming, we can expect increasingly intense hurricanes and northeasters along the Atlantic coastline.

For years, we heard about the “big one” that might hit New Orleans and Katrina brought that reality home. The so-called soup bowl effect became everyone’s worse nightmare and the city is still struggling in the face of what appears to be an uncaring government. What most of us don’t know is how vulnerable New York City is to a major storm.

The National Hurricane Center ranks regions of greatest concern along the Atlantic coast and Gulf of Mexico. New Orleans was only ranked number three. First on the list was the Ft. Lauderdale/Miami area and number two on the list was, surprisingly, New York City.

Sunday’s New York Times real estate section described about how buyers are increasingly looking at weather factors, storm surge charts and flood plains before they buy property in New York. The article had an accompanying chart and the data was staggering. Large parts of all five boroughs would face large storm surges with just a category two or three hurricane. Subways would be flooded with salt water in a storm surge, which unlike fresh water, could cause major long term damage to the system. Buildings built on sand might collapse and blown out high rise windows might become flying knives throughout the city.

In the Climate Institute’s publication, director Alexis Sloan Nussbaum wrote about the hypothetical impact of a major storm hitting the New York City area:

“Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005 and the four costly hurricanes that battered Florida and Alabama in 2004 would suggest that the Southeast is the region of the United States that is most susceptible to damage from major storms. However, such an assumption overlooks the enormous threat that such storms pose for the East Coast and, in particular, for New York City, which is considered to be quite vulnerable to the types of impacts that can be inflicted by hurricanes (tropical cyclones), northeasters (extra tropical cyclones), and coastal flooding events. Contributing to this vulnerability are the area’s nearly 1500 miles (about 2400 kilometers) of coastline and that four out of five boroughs are islands, supported by a regional transportation infrastructure that includes approximately 2,200 bridges and tunnels. In addition, massive development and high population density make evacuation difficult and therefore put coastal residents at high risk of storm damage and loss of life.”

And to drive home the point, the article gave past examples of storms that have actually hit the New York City area. For example, if the 1938 Great New England Hurricane had hit just 100 miles further to the west, the city would have had suffered unfathomable damage. Among the other examples were:

The Hurricane of 1821, which produced a sea level rise of up to 13 feet (about 4 meters) in one hour in the area that is now Battery Park City.

The “West Indian monster” of 1893, which triggered a 30-foot (about 9-meter) storm surge that razed nearly all man-made structures on its course through southern Brooklyn and Queens.

At least New Orleans knew it was coming. Even though the results were horrendous, they had evacuation plans and a basic awareness regarding the likely impact of a storm surge. Does anyone in New York City really believe that the city is prepared or has a serious plan for a major hurricane and its storm surge?