Following on Phillip’s post below about whether to rebuild New Orleans: House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., caught hell when he wondered aloud whether it made sense to rebuild a city that is 7 feet below sea level.
But some urban planners and others are also asking these tough questions, and they deserve a hearing. Slate has a good online debate about the controversy here.
I’m certain New Orleans will be rebuilt, for many reasons, although it might be smaller. The problems for rebuilders still loom large, however: How will the unique character of the city survive? And how will future storm catastrophes be avoided?
Raising the levee, for instance, could simply make the bowl-like city more deeply inundated in the next Category 5 hurricane.
This will be an engineering and urban planning challenge of the highest order.
That said, just because New Orleans is vulnerable to natural catastrophe is not, by itself, a reason to abandon it. Under that thinking, San Francisco wouldn’t have been rebuilt after the 1906 earthquake — and today America wouldn’t have one of the most beautiful cities in the world.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Too many exemptions
- JWink on Too many exemptions
- LonnythePlumber on Jail consultants straining patience
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
8 Comments
Having read the slate article, and the articles it links to, one wonders if indeed it makes sense to rebuild New Orleans.Of course it does. The city is too strategically linked to shipping to not be. The fact that it should be a lake is a moot point. Holland has had the same problem for centuries and still weathers the storm. The Army Corps of Engineers should now be able to rebuild the levees much better than they have been. The .05% storm of the century that was unplanned for can be taken into account and dealt with before it ever hits again.For all its poverty, neglect, poor education system, racism, and fear, New Orleans was a great city. It can be so again, but with the assistance it has needed for decades. These people need more than food, water and housing; they need jobs, quality education, and a political force that can beat down oppression. Most of all they need self respect. Hopefully, some major lessons learned during this catastrophe will hasten that.
New Orleans will be rebuilt, and you will see a Mardi Gras next year for sure.
But I would say that New Orleans will probably be about half the population that it once was. But it would still be a major city for commerce, tourism, and trade.
On a selfish note: I would love to visit the French Quarter and listen to some of the worlds greatest music, jazz and blues, played by some of the greatest musicians in the world before my time is up.Rebuild it, and I will come.
New Orleans will have to be rebuilt; it’s location is just too strategic for all sorts of national interests for it not to be.Maybe Colorado could spare them a mountain (it has so many) to break up and shove under the new city so it won’t be so vulnerable next time. New Orleans deserves it’s own acropolis anyway!
I disagree. Why not just rebuild the port facility where it is and move the city a few miles inland? Link it with up to date transit. We have the technology.
I hadn’t known before, but have recently read several places that New Oreans has been steadily sinking up to half an inch per year in places. So you have to wonder whether the place has a long term future at all.
Assuming that there is solid bedrock not too far under the surface, it shouldn’t cost too much to drive pilings and dump dirt over most of New Orleans until most of it was safely above lake and sea level. Of course, the many historic buildings and high downtown buildings can’t be lifted easily, so they would have to stay at their current low elevation and need to continue using pumps (just as they have for years) to keep ground and rain water out.
If the entire outskirts of New Orleans were raised, say, 30 ft, then the downtown and historic areas would be more than adequately protected from hurricane waters.
To keep New Orleans from sinking on an ongoing basis, the wetlands need to be restored.
Wetlands, shmetlands. The sinking is due to silt compaction under the buildings. Silt does that. It has nothing to do with wetlands.
Of course, if Gore were president there would be no global warming; but since he isn’t, the ocean waters will rise several feet next week. In which case, the wetlands are doomed no matter what we do.