Evacuation of New Orleans

[AikiDale]

Why is it that New Orleans police, national guard, liquor store owners and national news media personalities are safe but everyone else is in danger? Or is it just that those people are considered expendable?

[revchuck]

Having just relocated with my job from NOLA to Memphis, I don't understand the question. It could be having to go through two evacuations - taking my family to AL then me to here, and I'm still groggy.

The people who chose to stay behind, other than National Guard, police and other public safety folks, aren't considered expendable...just really stupid. They ignored a mandatory evacuation order, and stayed knowing in advance that they were absolutely on their own. Nobody is going to look for them or feed them or take care of them. They had three days of free transportation out of there. My National Guard unit was in charge of managing the buses, most of which were school buses; some people refused to get on them because they weren't air conditioned and/or didn't have movies. I'd be down there now if I weren't on active duty orders supporting Big Army.

Others stayed because they figured they were tough enough to make it through Katrina...with all kinds of support (food, water, medical) from outside. That won't be there this time.

Please note that the above refers not only to poor black residents of NOLA, but also to affluent, college-educated whites.

Also note that the vast majority of NOLA got out starting last Friday. Northbound interstates were crowded, running about three times normal traffic flow. This time was way better than last.

It looks like NOLA didn't take a direct hit, but I haven't yet heard about flooding.

[Big Shooter]

Why is it that taxpayers have to pay to transport a bunch of people that normally have no problem driving their unlicensed-unregistered-uninsured-selves around?

Edited September 2, 2008 by Big Shooter

[PhilTerry]

Why is is that taxpayers have to pay to transport a bunch of people that normally have no problem driving their unlicensed-unregistered-uninsured-selves around?

Wow BigShooter you are all heart today!

[Viggen]

Why is is that taxpayers have to pay to transport a bunch of people that normally have no problem driving their unlicensed-unregistered-uninsured-selves around?

Wow BigShooter you are all heart today!

Hoping everybody gets out OK or the storm diminishes. But it's a good point - how much has this below sea level area cost the public(tax payers) so far, and how much more tax money is going to be poured into the swamp to keep the inevitable floods at bay until the next "big one"? Is there a time and a place to call something a lost cause? Sooner rather than later might be better, certainly cheaper. Of course anybody who wants to stay on their own dime , well, I'm all for that.

[SiG Lady]

"...My National Guard unit was in charge of managing the buses, most of which were school buses; some people refused to get on them because they weren't air conditioned and/or didn't have movies. ..."

There are moments in time and tide when "comfort" is trumped by "survival." When are people going to get real...???!!! I have no sympathy here.

However, I have MUCH sympathy and gratitude for all the people who have--either thru volunteer work or duty (part of their jobs)--been consistently and repeatedly HELPING OUT during these kinds of unfortunate events.

It is said that New Orleans (and the surrounding delta area) is sinking a few feet every year anyway. I think it's high time for a total re-think of whether the area is even remotely LIVABLE any longer in the way that it has been previously.

[HSMITH]

Why is is that taxpayers have to pay to transport a bunch of people that normally have no problem driving their unlicensed-unregistered-uninsured-selves around?

I whole heartedly agree.

[murkish]

"I think it's high time for a total re-think of whether the area is even remotely LIVABLE any longer in the way that it has been previously." [/color]

I have been to NOLA many times. I love the city, its history and its people. Sadly, I have to agree with this statement.

Jack

[Mark K]

I watched some GEO expert the other day on TV saying that N.O. sinks .3-2" per year, while there is some natural rise in the gulf over time. He said the if they continue to just build levees higher, the N.O. will be 15-20 below sea level and several miles out in the gulf.

I love N.O., the French Quarter and the downtown business districts are built up on the natural river bank/levee, but I too wonder about the viability of the area.

I think that much would change naturally, if the goverment would stop covering property flood insurance when insurance companies will not cover it because of the high risk. This for me includes the places in the midwest along rivers, and costal properties. The reason we have higher and higher losses in these natural disasters, but because more and more people are building along the shores.

Makr.

[Jim Norman]

My basic feeling on this is: Don't allow rebuilding, turn the area into a large park, trade the land for higher ground. If I wanted to build a house in a swamp today the DEP, EPA, Greenpeace and a multitude of other organizations would put up all sorts of barriers. But, we keep allowing people to build on the beach and rebuild in areas that are BELOW SEA LEVEL! Why? Do we expect that suddenly the oceans and gulfs will lower their levels?

I for one am somewhat tired of paying my hard earned tax dollars over to people that keep building in areas that are unstable and prone to floods and landslides etc.

Does this apply to areas that are tornado prone? No, nor does it apply to earthquakes. We don't know where or when they will occur, but low lying areas in known floodplains????

Jim

[Nik Habicht]

Dale,

I got to hear from NY Times photographers who covered the aftermath of Katrina and it basically came down to this: The first amendment allows them to work, as long as they're not interfering with rescue/evacuation efforts and don't need rescuing themselves. The Times took that last part seriously --- equipping their people with training, survival gear, putting a private air ambulance company on standby for evacuation, etc.

My take is about like that: If we want access to unstable/dangerous situations then we A -- need to stay out of the way of any police/rescue/fire/national guard/utility crew efforts -- and B -- need to accept full responsibility for our safety and the consequences of our actions.....

[outerlimits]

once the water subsides, there's gonna be some good bass fishin' on bourbon st....

[Punkin Chunker]

I think that much would change naturally, if the goverment would stop covering property flood insurance when insurance companies will not cover it because of the high risk. . . . The reason we have higher and higher losses in these natural disasters, but because more and more people are building along the shores.

Makr.

I'm with you there. It's rediculous to take the consequences out of building in a disaster-prone area by subsidizing stupidity with OUR tax dollars.

Flood insurance oughta be:

1. Certain areas, not covered. Such as areas which are BELOW SEA LEVEL ON THE COAST!

2. Set a rational limit: First time flood loss -- rebuild. Second time, the owner cannot transfer the property and has to choose:

a. Exercise emminent domain -- condemn, reimburse, not allow any rebuild, or;

b. Allow rebuild with no coverage available if the owner signs a waiver of any claims for property damage or rescue service.

But then, I'm not in the insurance business, so . . . .

Edited September 1, 2008 by Punkin Chunker

[ChrisStock]

I hear you loud and clear, AikiDale

Actually, we have something like this in place here in FL, it occurred after Andrew hit. There are places on the coast where NO insurance is offered at any price. No insurance = no mortgage, which means that only a fool with 100% cash for building expenses can afford to build it at their own risk...no public//governmental bailout will come.

I too loathe having to foot the bill for someone else's stupidity/laziness over and over, and over and.....

Why oh why was this colony established in a low lying swamp?

[lmccrock]

Why oh why was this colony established in a low lying swamp?

Some of it was not as low lying when it was built. It sunk over the last 60 years since those neighborhoods were built. I grew up in Gentilly Woods, which was 15-20 feet above see level after WW2 when the subdivision was built. Now, it is more like 5 feet above, and flooded after Katrina. Alot of the flood threat can be fixed by closing some man-made infrastructure, like the MR-GO, which is a nice straight path from the Gulf into NO. Ok, better stop there so I don't get myself started.

Lee

[AikiDale]

Why oh why was this colony established in a low lying swamp?

Like Lee said, it was not originally built below sea level. As we have engineered the Mississippi and the wetlands in the Delta region we created the problem. While everyone is away would be a good time to rebuild NO farther North, blow up the levys and let the river do its thing.

[BigDave]

I am not an insurance agent - use this information with caution.

The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) does have substantial damage provision in the codes adopted by the communities (e.g. NOLA, Metarie). In a nutshell, if you are in a special hazard area (i.e. "floodplain") and a flood loss results in damages >50% of the market value, you must bring the building into compliance with the local flood building codes.

Let's say your house is >50% damaged by flood and the elevation of your lowest floor is +0.0' (sea level) and you are in an A zone. The flood maps in your neighborhood have change since your home was originally built and let's say the base flood elevation (BFE - minimum elevation height for all new construction) is +3.0. In this case, before you could start repairs (putting back drywall, trim, cabinets, flooring, electrical, etc.) you would need to elevate your lowest habitable floor to at least +3.0'. Depending on the building, this can cost $25k up to $100k for just elevating the existing structure. You can also tear down and start over (at the new height) or move the entire building to another site outside of the hazard area (e.g. a C zone).

The sticky wicket is left in the hands of the local community officials. They have a large say-so in when and if these BFEs are adopted and at what levels. If you were an elected official, how might you feel if your decision left 80% of your constituents having to fork out up to $50k just so they could start rebuilding - not actually rebuild - just get the building into a place where they could start? On the outside its easy to say. On the inside - not so much. Those areas are very, very insular. Generation after generation after generation of family has lived in those homes, on those blocks.

Oh, and why was this place built where it was. It's the intersection of the biggest shipping river of the US and the Gulf of Mexico - it is a port. Ports are strategic.

And, if you really want to talk about nightmares - just look out your window the next time you take off or land from Miami Int'l Airport. If that place takes a big one head-on, it will make NOLA look like picnic. The same goes for NYC.