N.O. Flooding Again.

[Stingray]

Recently patched levees already failing. The water is apparantly rushing into the low elevation areas like the Ninth Ward.

-S

[DYNAGOD]

good, maybe that will knock some sense into the politicians throwing money into that city to try and rebuild it..
you dont build a house on a bad foundation, ie a city under sea level..
a new lake new orleans could bring in plenty of revenue for recreational boating..

[Dartful Dodger]

a new lake new orleans could bring in plenty of revenue for recreational boating..

Nothing screams plenty of revenue for recreational boating like raw sewage, dead bodies and oil slicks.

[ChadTower]

Yeah, and they planned the city out fully ahead of time.

[Stingray]

I can't imagine that anyone would want to rebuild the very low areas like the 9th ward. A good idea would be to remove all of what's left of the buildings and then dig it out several feet deeper, then just leave it. This would give water from future floods somewhere harmless to go until it can be pumped out again. The area could even be used as a park or something during non-flood times.

-S

[ChadTower]

Yeah, let's bring the kids to play where the emergency raw sewage overflows go.

You know they'll rebuild it all and call it urban renewal.  If they don't, every black activist group in north america will scream racism.

[Stingray]

Okay, I'm willing to concede that the park idea may not work, but having a big pit in the lowest part of the city to catch flood water doesn't seem like a bad idea to me.

-S

[ChadTower]

Many cities have that.  They didn't have to bulldoze entire black neighborhoods to do it, though.

That's a NASTY political minefield.  No politician would ever go near it in a city where blacks are the majority.

[Stingray]

You're probably right. The only reason I thought of it at all is that I know that several flood prone areas in Tulsa have similar flood pits. I know that's not what they actually call them, but I can't think of the correct term off the top of my head.

Just came across this:

As many as 500,000 people in southwestern Louisiana, many of them already displaced by Hurricane Katrina, were told to evacuate. And for those who refused to leave, Gov. Kathleen Blanco advised: "Perhaps they should write their Security numbers on their arms with indelible ink."

Doesn't sound like they have high hopes regarding NO's chances against Rita.

-S

[ChadTower]

Well, at some point, you have to let the stubborn take their chances.  We can't all follow Seph into his house to give him a ticket.

[RayB]

I've heard that SS# quote long before Rita even existed. Someone was making the rounds prior to Katrina and telling people exactly that. I'm wondering if this quote is being mis-applied to the current situtation, or if it's just considered the way to snap stubborn people out of there stupors....

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Well, at some point, you have to let the stubborn take their chances.

I don't think I've heard anyone argue against that. Even the most Liberal of the Liberals. I think the problem arises when people begin using the bad decisions of the "stubborn" to paint over the reality of the "less fortunate."

I don't think it's reasonable, as some people have tried to do, to equate people who knew they had an option to leave, had the resources to leave, yet chose to say; with people who feel they have so few options in their day-to-day existence, who posses so few resources, they felt (rightly or wrongly) that they had no other option than to stay with their homes and belongings.

I've been so broke before (I wouldn't say I was impoverished, but pretty damn close) that I couldn't take advantage of certain *immediate* opportunities because they led to further options, directly afterward, I couldn't afford. I've been so broke before that I might even take my chances against a Hurricane.


mrC

[ChadTower]

I've never been so broke that I felt it was intelligent to stay in the path of a category 5 hurricane.  I've had times where I had no money or food, but fight or flight has nothing to do with resources at that point.  You either grab your bag and get to walking or you stick around.

If you have nothing, you have nothing to lose, either.  It's better to sleep in a park than to die in a flood.

[billf]

You're probably right. The only reason I thought of it at all is that I know that several flood prone areas in Tulsa have similar flood pits. I know that's not what they actually call them, but I can't think of the correct term off the top of my head.

I think your thinking of a detention pond, although to help out in New Orleans, I think it would have to be a pretty massive detention pond.

There are also retention ponds.

[ChadTower]

Retention ponds are like a tiny version of the New Orleans levees.  They've pretty much implemented everything that can be done.  They just didn't maintain it well enough to stand up to a cat 5 storm in 2005.

[billf]

Retention ponds are like a tiny version of the New Orleans levees.

Exactly.

[ChadTower]

In that case, good design.  Don't even give it a chance to withstand a viable possibility.

[Stingray]

Detention/ retention ponds - that's the term I was looking for. Thanks for connecting the dots for me.

-S

[billf]

I'm pretty sure that's what I remembering reading somewhere.  They were built to withstand a cat 3, not a cat 5.  Doesn' make any sense to me.

[ChadTower]

I spent most of high school in detention.

[billf]

not retention???   

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I've never been so broke that I felt it was intelligent to stay in the path of a category 5 hurricane.

My hypothetical had nothing to do with it being deemed the "intelligent" choice, instead I proposed that given such extenuating circumstances it may have been deemed the only choice.

I've had times where I had no money or food, but fight or flight has nothing to do with resources at that point.  You either grab your bag and get to walking or you stick around.

You said it...fight or flight. That's what it really boils down to. So, we can surmise that, given the same circumstances/financial status, your instinct would be to run. Fine. Others in that position (or most likely worse positions, since they are born of generations of poverty) felt they had no other option than to stay and "fight" (meaning protect their goods, batten down the hatches, battle the storm, etc.).

My argument is that you (or anyone else) shouldn't be able to fault them for that.


mrC

[ChadTower]

I can't fault them, no, but it was very clearly the wrong choice.

[NoOne=NBA=]

Having stayed awake in Sunday School when they told the story about the wise man (who built his house on the rock) and the fool (who built his house on the sand), I feel obligated to question the mental capacity of anyone supporting a plan to rebuild an entire city below sea level, and at the bottom of a river.

[DYNAGOD]

I dont see katrina as a natural disaster , i see it as a civil engineering failure.  wether that failure was brought on by political lethargy or the wears of time is a discussion for another thread,but ultimately,one has to beg the question..
who builds a city next to the sea, under sea level??

and you say toxic sludge, i say have you ever seen hair this shiny?

[ChadTower]

When the goal is to stay elected, rather than to do what is best for the people, they will rebuild.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

When the goal is to stay elected, rather than to do what is best for the people, they will rebuild.

Sadly, you are probably right. I have no delusions that they will do anything other than handout no-bid contracts to their big business buddies, while avoiding a complete reengineering of the city's design.

It has already started; Halliburton got the job, and Rove (a political strategist/fundraiser with no disaster management or construction experience) has been assigned to oversee the entire thing.


mrC

[NoOne=NBA=]

I dont see katrina as a natural disaster , i see it as a civil engineering failure.

So how many years of engineering school do you need to attend to learn that water flows downhill?