Don't Rebuild--Relocate

[selenite0]

There's going to be a lot of money allocated for the people in New Orleans. I'm all for that--these people are having a hard time and need help. But I want one string attached to the money for the people whose homes were destroyed.

BUILD YOUR NEW HOUSE SOMEWHERE ABOVE SEA LEVEL

People held back the water for a long time, but it eventually won. There's no sense starting the same fight over again. Build some levees around the historical monuments so the tourists can enjoy them. But for the homes and businesses, it's time to go someplace else. Call it North New Orleans. Or maybe Canuteville.

Comments

[gridlockjoe.livejournal.com]

I'm kinda partial to "New and Improved Orleans".

[celticdragonfly.livejournal.com]

Um, hon? North New Orleans is called Lake Ponchartrain.

Slightly less humorously, it's called Metairie. It flooded, too.

And where do all the people working for the tourist trade live? They can't afford to go live farther away. The areas farther away and higher up are more expensive.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

I thought that Metairie was West New Orleans? Or is my memory of NO geography skewed?

[selenite.livejournal.com]

WNW New Orleans by this map:
http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?countryid=250&addtohistory=&country=US&address=&city=Metairie%20&state=LA&zipcode=&historyid=&submit=Get%20Map

[rillifane.livejournal.com]

At last! Someone else who realizes that rebuilding a city below sea level on a hurricaine swept coast isn't the brightest of ideas.

[mycroftca.livejournal.com]

Especially as the ice caps melt with global warming and the seas rise...

[rillifane.livejournal.com]

Indeed. We are in a natural warming cycle as the current "little ice age" comes to an end. We need to acknowledge this reality.

[joyeuse13.livejournal.com]

When I lived in NJ, the rich folks had beach houses which constantly got swept away during hurricanes. Of course, there is government aid money available for disaster relief. How nice that the rich folks could rebuild their beach houses in exactly the same place with my tax money.

We always lived far enough inland that hurricanes were no more than big windy rainstorms.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

Sure, as though that is going to happen. Just look at San Francisco after its various earthquakes, the many parts of Florida hit by hurricanes again and again, and the list goes on.

The principle is a good one, don't get me wrong, but it is human nature to want to rebuild where the old house was. And don't forget that many of those buildings have been there for over 100 years, some probably over 200 years. So not as though this is something that happens frequently.

Better to NOT gut the federal budget for the New Orleans area Army Corp of Engineers to maintain the levees and other flood control measures. Like duh, that was a really good move, wasn't it?

[selenite.livejournal.com]

it is human nature to want to rebuild where the old house was.

Yeah. But they can do that with their own money if they want.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

So, should the government buy the land from them so that they'll be able to buy land elsewhere? I suspect that many folks won't be able to afford to relocate without significant help. What about the jobs in the New Orleans area? Relocate all of them? What about the tourism-related jobs? That was a big industry in NO. They won't be able to be relocated, since the whole point of that tourist industry was NO and its culture and history. Not that simple, I'm afraid.

[thegameiam.livejournal.com]

So, should the government buy the land from them so that they'll be able to buy land elsewhere?

In a word, YES! This is exactly why we have the concept of eminent domain, as recently ratified by the Supreme Court in the Kelo case.

The government is going to spend gigantic $$, and the right thing to spend it on is a city where it's a bit less likely to get wiped out by a hurricane. Not to say that there wouldn't be damage, but not on the same scale...

We actually have an opportunity here to build a city from scratch, using modern design principles - infrastructure and mass transit placed in such a way as to improve people's lives...

[xinef.livejournal.com]

Ok, next question, WHERE??? You'd have to appropriate one heck of a lot of land to rehouse some half a million people, and that is just New Orleans.

What about jobs? Sure some can be relocated, but what about those who worked in the port of New Orleans? Or at the oil refineries located close to the oil terminal? Or those involved in tourism in New Orleans?

From what I know (and I admit that my knowledge is limited), there isn't much land above sea level around those parts, which is one reason for the problems now. So where the heck do you relocate them to???

[thegameiam.livejournal.com]

I'm only starting to formulate my opinions, so they may be thoroughly trumped by facts :)

I would think that once the Gov't has bought the (now worthless) land from the people for a decent amount of money, it can wash its hands - i.e. where individuals move is not the concern of the Gov't - give them a pile of money and they'll find somewhere else to live.

The real advantage of this would be taking the under-water "land" out of circulation, so that any future development would happen uphill. Yeah, it'd still be vulnerable to flood, but not like NO was.

[selenite.livejournal.com]

How about saying "you're free adults, make your own decisions, here's a voucher" and not interfering? Like we do when a big company goes out of business for other reasons. If they want to build a new city in Louisiana, or Mississippi, the local governments can work it out. If they want to move elsewhere, there's a lot of land all over the country. If they want to stay in New Orleans, they can bid on the part of the remaining 20%. Let's not distort the decisionmaking by saying "you must go back to the same hazardous spot you just got driven out of or be penniless."

[xinef.livejournal.com]

I agree with the principles above, but am not sure it is practical.

1. Does the US have enough money to be able to buy out the land for anyone who wants out of NO? Replacing houses is way different from buying the land too.

2. Would it go over politically, or would it be the call of death for any politician who promoted it?

Other questions:
A. Who in their right mind is going to start a new business in New Orleans for a long time to come? (Other than home rebuilding, mould remediation, etc)

B. Is New Orleans going to end up a slum with low cost rebuilding projects?

[selenite.livejournal.com]

1. Ooodles of money. Just need to squeeze it out of the taxpayers. Which makes this a subset of:

2. Dunno. I don't think it's necessary to take the land from the owners. If they want to rebuild on their own nickle I don't feel a need to stop them. Just offer them $X on condition they build elsewhere. Or if $X is going to be offered no matter what, don't condition it on building in the same spot.

A. No one, I hope. Other than glass bottom boat operators and immigrant gondoliers. The unflooded 20% will probably pick up a lot of the wiped out tourist traps.

B. Isn't that what much of the flooded areas were? Let's not subsidize creating new ones.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

2. But if you want them to build elsewhere than on the lot that they own in NO, you have to give them more $$ than if they were just going to rebuild in the same place. So one amount to rebuild in same place, one amount plus extra to rebuild somewhere else, and the gov't then owns that lot. Surely?

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Let the recipients decide. Give 'em $X. They can spend it on rebuilding where they were (unless it's a red-lined [blue-lined?] spot, maybe). Or spend it as down payment on a place in New York or Los Angeles, with a $12X mortgage. Or buy a house in Nebraska and have $0.7X left in the bank for new furniture and stuff. Or blow it all on a trip around the world and start from zero when it runs out.

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Another option--in areas where the homes have been wiped out, put in some retaining walls and fill them with dirt until you're above sea level. You can keep the property lines the same, just move everything up vertically. Probably couldn't do that everywhere, but reclaiming a portion at a time would work and the city could grow back to its old size.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

Good idea in principle. Where do you find the clean fill in that sort of volume? And compact it enough to be able to build homes on it that won't subside?

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Good question for an experienced civil engineer, which I'm not. But a CivE will answer that in dollars and months. Whether it's a good answer or not should be left up to the people who want to rebuild on the old site.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

I agree that the insurance money should not be tied to rebuilding on the same property. But I suspect that without some incentive to move out, a lot of folks will just take the path of least resistance and rebuild where the old home was.

Oh my. . .

[p-o-u-n-c-e-r.livejournal.com]

I have such deep revulsion to the concept of building around "design principles" that I shudder at the notion -- even though I happen to agree with the basic principle: "Don't build in a flood plane".

[mycroftca.livejournal.com]

Omighod!

ROTFLMAO

That's beautifully sick...

[coalboy.livejournal.com]

YES! My father was an insurance agent; refused to insure houses built on flood plains.

[daveamongus.livejournal.com]

tappu and I have been talking on this topic quite a bit--I seem to rememer similar discussions a couple years ago when the Mississippi hit record levels, and the idiots flooded out there said, "build the levees higher, damnit."

Big water is pretty, but as any sailor will tell you, it's damn dangerous.

How about those closed Military Bases?

[bkseiver.livejournal.com]

They are planning to shelter 25K people in San Antonio's closed AFB. Know there were other bases recently closed. Lets call them "new-NOLA"

Re: How about those closed Military Bases?

[alabamadragon.livejournal.com]

good point!

[xinef.livejournal.com]

Check out http://www.nola.com/newslogs/breakingtp/index.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_Times-Picayune/archives/2005_09.html#075833.

At least one person out there agrees with you!!

[selenite.livejournal.com]

Yeah . . . but I'm wondering if that has more to do with the cost-benefit ratios of rebuilding, or that New Orleans voted 78% Democratic last year.
/cynical

[xinef.livejournal.com]

Yeah well, would he be better off with all of those Democrats in one area or spread over the state? :)

[selenite.livejournal.com]

True, if you want to do gerrymandering right anything over 52% is a waste.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

P.s. You may need to scroll down. When I went to that link the article was at the top. It isn't any more. Look for the headline "House Speaker: Rebuilding N.O. doesn't make sense".