Should New Orleans be rebuilt?

Maybe I should put on a rainsuit and start ducking the flying tomatoes....but I think that some serious consideration should be giving to rebuilding a city below sea level that is surrounded by two big bodies of water.

Obviously, people have lived there for a long time and will want to go back and not all of the homes are ruined and it is an important port city...but should the rebuild be for a smaller city? Or relocate some parts to higher ground (if that is geographically feasible)?

[PrincessFiona]

My opinion.....

The port will have to stay...but...the town itself should be relocated somewhere else. It can still be "New Orleans"...just now..it would be new New Orleans.

It will cost billions and billions of dollars to rebuild and all levees would have to be upgraded to withstand a hit greater than a level 3 hurricane...which would cost more money. That still wouldn't protect the city from the winds/and other damage done by a hurricane.

The government should simply stop providing flood insurance for people who choose to build in low-lying flood-prone areas. Why should our tax dollars pay for the rebuilding of million dollar homes again and again. The poor people likely didn't carry any insurance and won't be able to rebuild without serious federal assistance anyway.

If you and I are going to foot the bill, lets make sure that we're not going to have to do it again if another big hurricane hits.

:!

I'd say rebuild it up to a point. The areas that were built like a hundred years ago and didn't suffer as much damage could be rebuilt, but all those buildings that were totally destroyed...wasn't the damage worst in recently(since 1970) developments?

All logical points, but you know they're going to rebuild there. There are many points in the world that continue to get flattened by mother nature, and we just keep building there. Americans pretty much personify "stubborn" where those kinds of things are concerned.

Well, as I am thinking about this, I guess that no one is saying -- hey, let's move San Francisco (or LA) because of the risk of a major earthquake. And when there have been quakes there before, the area is rebuilt.

But, it seems like there can be more building code protection for earthquakes than there can be for living below sea level and smack between two big bodies of water in an area prone to hurricanes -- and that the building destroys some of the natural protection against flooding. It seems foolish to rebuild parts of New Orleans. But I'll just wait for George W to call me and ask my opinion about all of this.

[PrincessFiona]

Nellie,

If SanFransisco was hit by the big one and a large part of the city was destroyed and we knew that more big ones would come...I would be for moving san fran too. :!

[DCJenn]

Part of the reason why the death toll from the Tsunami was so high was because of unrestricted and rampent building along the coasts of the Islands. People want water views. and they'll sit in a house 9 feet below sea level to keep them. It's stupid.

My parents are living in a house that was built on land that until 2003 had a different house on it. Why is their new house new? The old house was condemned after Isabel. It's a nice house and they have a great view, but I certainly would feel slightly uncomfortable living there.

Jenn

[Rapunzel]

This is such a good question.

I think the fact is the city will be rebuilt in some form or another. I guess it's the stubborness of human nature to see something that is as crazy as building a city in the flood plain of one of the biggest rivers in the world, a nearby lake, AND an ocean and think, "Man, we oughtta do that!"

My opinion is that there really shouldn't be a residential area in the flood plain. If people do rebuild houses in the area then I think it's entirely within reason for insurance companies to refuse flood coverage to people committing that idiocy.

Jennifer

[houseelf]

Wow, do...we...have...a...consensus?

In truth, I agree that it seems ludicrous to rebuild N.O. exactly as it was before. Keep it as a port, perhaps allow some business, and hey, for good measure try to restore and preserve the ecosystem. (What a novel idea!) But allowing residences, schools, nursing homes, trailer parks. Eek... I don't think that this is a fabulous idea. Too much money for too little return in a nation that has plenty of room.

Of course, it also seems crazy to live in a desert without a reasonable water table (Arizona, New Mexico?) on a fault line (California, Alaska?) or in the tundra where a natural catastrophe would make uninhabitable without electricity (power shortages could kill the elderly, poor, and otherwise vulnerable during the coldest months).

Gee, I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth, perhaps I should run for office.

Kelly

[HeartRN]

Same thing with people who repeatedly stick their trailers in the middle of tornado alley, i.e. living in KS with no basement/cellar. This happened so much when I grew up in KS (and still does).

Of course, DH and I thought we would be spared disasters when we moved to VA, and in three years we have endured the following:

1. The DC snipers who for all intents and purposes scared the hell out of Richmond residents secondary to their proximity to the city (and the fact that a victim who survived spent his time recovering in our hospital here)
2. Hurricane Isabel--I was 8 months pregnant (ugh!)
3. Tropical Storm Gaston (massive flooding)
4. A few bizarre thunderstorms involving tornadoes
5. A downtown fire

I'm sure the walls will cave in and we'll be running to the streets when the "Big One" strikes in CA after we move there! :!

[Rapunzel]

What really needs to happen is people need to realize the consequences of where they live and prepare accordingly. Live in San Francisco? Better prepare for a big earthquake or two! Live in Dallas (as I did most of my life)? Better have a plan for what to do if a tornado blows through your house. Live in New Orleans? Better plan for a flood!

Seriously, I am so tired of this attitude that others - particularly the government - should be taking care of us so we shouldn't plan for a disaster. I don't care if you're poor! I was dirt poor growing up but we still managed to prepare! Unless we're equating poverty with idiocy being poor is just no excuse for not preparing for the NORMAL calamities associated with your geographic area.

Message learned here? Have a good idea of what bad things can happen to you and do what you can to protect your family if those awful things happen. In other words, the Boy Scout motto: Be Prepared. Rant over.

Jennifer