possible debate...should they rebuild?

[Rock'n Robin]

I have been thinking about this all week. I know that NOLA was settled in the 18th century (I think). It was prone to floods all along, but just in the last half century or so has industry and such developed as to put it into this critical danger. Knowing the risks, they designed elaborate pump systems and put the levees in after Hurricane Betsy, I believe. They knew, however, that anything over a cat. 3 would be a disaster, yet the area continued to be developed. There has been talk for a few years that this COULD happen in a cat. 4 or 5 situation. Now that it has, should NOLA be rebuilt as it is now? If property owners are not allowed to rebuild homes on the shores of NC or other atlantic states due to hurricane dangers, etc., should an entire city prone to this disaster be put back in the same manner? Realistically, NOLA will never be the same--if the historic structures made it through the flooding, who knows if they will be allowed to stand in a contaminated condition.
So--should NOLA be rebuilt as it was, should they find some way to bring in a bunch of backfill to build it up to sea level, or should they just cut the losses and relocate things elsewhere, like they did in Love Canal?
Please don't flame me, I think this is a legitimate question from someone who lives in a completely flat area of the Midwest where only Noah's flood could get as bad as what I'm seeing in NOLA. I love my home too, but if it was structually damaged and contaminated by all kinds of waste, and there was a smidgen of a chance it could happen again, I wouldn't want to stay in this location.
Robin M.

 

[GEM]

Sure, I think they should rebuild it. I grew up in tornado alley. We could have been hit by the "big one" any given spring, and I did see many communities totally flattened over the years. I'm talking about whole towns pretty much wiped out with only minutes of warning - but so far nobody has abandoned the state of Oklahoma. People still build cities in earthquake zones as well. New Orleans is a city with an incredible history and culture. There is nowhere like it anywhere else in the United States, and I hope to see it grow again - although I know recovery will take decades. Look at what happened in Galveston, Texas in 1900. That hurricane was the largest natural disaster in US history. Around 10,000 people lost their lives - but Galveston's still there today.

 

[rascalmom]

I think the difference between Tornado Alley and NO is that the tornado damage is so random. I have lived in Oklahoma for most of my life & while I have certainly seen tornado damage, I have never really been personally effected by it. They know that hurricanes are going to keep rolling into the gulf. With a tornado, you don't have the storm surge issues. And a tornado has never taken out a huge metropolitan area like we are seeing with NO before. Even when the huge F5 struck here a few years back - you could still drive just a couple of miles & be able to go to an undamaged area with open stores, working utilities, etc.

Then there is the river. Steve posted a very interesting article earlier today about the decades long battle to prevent the Mississippi from taking a natural change in course. Either way, hurricane or river flooding - NO is in danger. I agree that is a beautiful, historic area. My dad lived there when he & my mom were first dating & worked there for awhile after they were married. I remember the trips that we took there when I was growing up. Truly a unique city - so much style & mystique. But basic survival aside - when will it be economically viable to try to make a "go" of it there again?

 

[arminnie]

I have been thinking about this all week. I know that NOLA was settled in the 18th century (I think).

New Orleans had it's 300th birthday many years ago - a couple of years before Philadelphia did.

 

[JimB.]

Rebuild New Orleans?? Absolutely. But I think that the repairs/rebuilding of New Orleans is actually going to be the CHEAP part of the scenario.

This storm showed how inadequate the protection provided by the existing levee system is.

I would bet that a total re-engineering of this is going to occur in the coming years.

One thing that always gets to me is how "surprised" governments are when these things fail. We seem to be a society that is very slow to realize the need for upgrading our infrastructure until the "big one" hits. FPL in Florida is a case in point. Very little upgrades or "hardening" of their electric grids in the past decades, and when a bunch of hurricanes come along and smack the h*** out of the electric infrastructure, they are "shocked" & "surprised".

The levee system of NOLA was designed to protect from and pump out rainwater. The system was not designed to protect from massive storm & hurricane flooding.

Oooops.

Their bad. If it had been, people may be moving back after the antiquated power grid has been restored. Seriously, I doubt that Mardi Gras will be celebrated there next year.

 

[bicker]

I agree with Robin. Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice; shame on me. It is appropriate to build cities ABOVE sea love.

 

[wvrevy]

From way up here in the hills of West-by-God-Virginny, it's easy for me to say that they should just let that area go back to the wilds and relocate everyone elsewhere. But we're talking about these people's homes...their entire lives. I don't know that, if it was me living in that area, I would feel anywhere near the same as the me sitting up here in the hills.

 

[bicker]

If they're not destroyed, then perhaps you're correct. However, that which is utterly destroyed cannot really be considered "homes" IMHO. Repair; yes. Rebuild; no.

 

[meandtheguys2]

From way up here in the hills of West-by-God-Virginny, it's easy for me to say that they should just let that area go back to the wilds and relocate everyone elsewhere. But we're talking about these people's homes...their entire lives. I don't know that, if it was me living in that area, I would feel anywhere near the same as the me sitting up here in the hills.

Very well said. All logic says it is ridiculous to build below sea level, but I know plenty who rebuilt on the flood plane after Ivan last year destroyed their homes.

 

[goofyforlife]

Ugg....but realistically..what is going to be left...OK maybe your roof is still on...but ewww it's been soaking in toxic sludge water for over a month....
I would think everything would need to be condemned and torn down for fear of mold....

What a mess.....

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

If they're not destroyed, then perhaps you're correct. However, that which is utterly destroyed cannot really be considered "homes" IMHO. Repair; yes. Rebuild; no.

For that matter there are towns well inland in Mississippi that are flattened. Should they not rebuild. I mean--2 destructive hurricanes in 39 years. Maybe they should just close the state.

It is very easy to pass judgement on the city of New Orleans and just say close up shop.

As far as the flooded homes--they are public health hazard. They are going to have to bull doze the properties. There is no way those properties will be anywhere close to salvagable when they are saying the once the pumps start it would take a whole month to pump out the water.

 

[totalia]

400 years its been settled for. At least according to the New Orleans history I've learned. its one of the oldest cities in North America.

I don't think its a matter of should they rebuild. I think its a matter of they WILL rebiuld. There are alot of people that want to go home. That, no matter how bad its been, they will go back.

 

[jrydberg]

Just a correction here. New Orleans was founded in 1718 (with fur traders settling around there about a decade before the official founding), making it 287 years old.

As for whether it should be rebuilt, whether it should or not, it will be.

 

[totalia]

*nods* Yes, I know but people have been living there longer. it became a real acknowledged city in 1718. That was not when the French first landed. At least as I have been given to understand from all the history, the museums and the like inside the city.

Of course, I guess it could all be lies and tourist crap and the only time that matters is after it became a gvt acknowledged city rather than the penal colony it began as.

 

[Conversationist]

I heard estimates that 75% of the homes have serious damage and may be unlivable. Who will pay to remodel the homes so they are up to code? Who will do all the work? Is there enough tradespeople available to rebuild 100,000 homes in the next few years?

Most of the people have no flood insurance. Will the federal government rebuild everyones home out of general tax revenue. It would cost tens of billions of dollars. Can you picture the red tape to get that done.

I suspect a large amount of the City will never be rebuilt.

 

[totalia]

I'm rather thinking that there is alot of people who won't even go back. If their home are gone, their places of business are gone, the whole city trashed, what's the point in going back?

My fiance says he isn't even going to bother to go back to see if anything is left. He's going to start putting his life back together in Tennessee. I don't think he will move back.

 

[jrydberg]

La Salle landed in, named and claimed Louisiana in 1682. Settlements did not begin until decades later.

 

[totalia]

Maybe thats the date I'm thinking of then. Sorry. Good gods. Regardless, its still alot older than people keep claiming it is. Which is the point I was trying to make. Or had you missed that and just decided to take everything I said as exact? Stop being so bloody litteral.

 

[jrydberg]

My apologies for relying on the facts

 

[totalia]

Yes, from now on, I will call a spade a spade and be completely exact in every single post so it can't be picked apart using metaphores and exageration just like everyone else does on these boards. After all, if its 12:35:45 pm, then thats exact right? Instead of its around 12:30 pm because nothing else will do. That way no one can jump on me for it.

Sorry for not being exact and assuming that people will actually understand the meaning.