We Environmentalist Were Right, doh

[BeFree]

We said don't build in floodplains, don't destroy wetlands, and don't think man can conquer nature.

If they had listened to us, thousands of lives and billions of dollars would have been saved in New Orleans alone.

So, what do we say now, and will they listen?

I say: Bullet trains from the port of New Orleans to a new city on a hill well above the Mississippi floodplain. A city with solar power, non-polluting sewage systems and automobile less transportation.

You eniros out there: What do you have to say about how we rebuild the homes of the hundreds of thousands of homeless former New Orleanins?

[whistle]

1. New Orleans was there long before environmentalists came on...

...the scene, so they could hardly stop what was about to happen. However, if played properly the environmentalists can point to the preparations by New Orleans and other Gulf Coast communities as totally fruitless.

I do like the idea of "...Bullet trains from the port of New Orleans to a new city on a hill well above the Mississippi floodplain. A city with solar power, non-polluting sewage systems and automobile less transportation." What hill would than be?

[BeFree]

2. Environmentalist have always been warning

Our brothers from doing stupid things in their environment, but they never listened for very long, eh? It is time they listened to us. Now is as good an opportunity as ever. It may be a rebirth of environmentalism.

"City on a hill" is a figurative term. I'd say any place there is an elevation above sea level of 25 feet or so would qualify as a good place for this new New Orleans.

The port needs workers, the workers need a city and the people need a new beginning. Lets do it right this time.

[enki23]

6. the highest ground in most of louisiana is near large rivers

there are no hills to speak of anywhere near new orleans. yeah, most of new orleans is below sea level. the same can be said for most of southern louisiana.

and there certainly isn't anywhere outside the "misissippi floodplain" in the vicinity which would be worth trying to build on. in new orleans, the areas *closest* to the river were least affected by this disaster.

[enki23]

9. em eye ess ess eye ess ess eye pee pee eye...

[dcfirefighter]

3. I posted this in general

the mississipi has been trying to reroute down the atchafalaya for decades.

river freight is not as economically useful as it once was, at least not to the rest of the country. It's main advantage is transporting bulk, low-value, high volume commodities. However, with these types of cargoes, trains have very good performance, and use only slightly more energy than barges. However, we spend billions through the ACOE on waterway maintenace.

The deepwater Port of New Orleans, which IS important, should be rebuilt at a more sustainable location in the region. I suggest this city be named Newport, but that's just me.

The Vieux Carre of New Orleans, built first, and on the highest ground, is historically and culturally important, and should be protected by new levees and flood control. It is my understanding that most of this area was largely 'spared' by Katrina. A city, based on tourism & entertainment, could be much smaller than the existing New Orleans, and protected by a higher, but smaller, system of levees.

In most cities, roads, streets, and parking take up about 50% of the land area. Eliminate this area in the rebuilt New Orleans, and design a carfree transit oriented city around 30 or so transit nodes, each serving a fairly dense population of around 10-12,000 (including tourists). A fairly cheap surface tram system running at a line speed of 15 mph (top speed of ~22 mph) could provide maximum trip times in such a city of 40 minutes door-to-door, with most trips being under 20 minutes.

[gordontron]

4. I heard about the problem a year ago or so on npr

the idea of a new city is intriguing, the major problem is what to do with the ghost town. Also another problem with building a new city is all the raw materials needed may cancel any environmental gains. Assuming those problems could be overcome building a new environmentally responsible city with new urbanism and a modern public transportation system would be amazing. Not to mention you could employ all of the jobless hurricane victims with planning, management, or construction jobs. Another problem however is where do you put everybody while the new city is being built? just some thoughts

[dcfirefighter]

5. Ghost town

probably, at first.

I think that the Port of Louisiana will need to be built before New Orleans - and this should be somewhere else, somewhere more protected, and more sustainable. This new (or enlarged existing) city would employ and house many folks displaced by the disaster.

I am quite willing to forgo Mississipi River cargo traffic - it doesn't seem cost-effective vs. rail, from a national standpoint. However, it would be useful for shipping in aggregate, fill, and other construction materials. After that, quit maintenance, and let it silt up as nature intended.

New Orleans has a natural draw - history, culture, music, entertainment, etc. All we have to do is stand out of the way, and people will move there, especially those with ties to the city, e.g. many of those who were displaced out.

Unfortunately, the old sections of the city are the 'rich' sections - not particularly economically diverse. This leads further to the problem of lower income housing - any new housing is almost always expensive, even when it's designed to be affordable. However, I think that even the more libertarian of us liberals would concede that a little help is in order.

Ultimately, in the name of standing out of the way of rebuilding new orleans, I suggest the following:
1) condemn all the unsalvageable and unsustainable locations, and pay their owners their assessed value prior to Katrina. Reclaim this area as wetlands.
2) condemn all the salvageable and sustainable locations for clean-up. Return these buildings to their owners at the end of cleaning. Assign the land to a quasi-governmental New Orleans Federal Land Trust. Charge market rate ground leases for the properties. Use this revenue to run the government of New Orleans.
3) build a world class modern tram system such that the entirety of the remaining city is within a short walk of a station. Pay for the 24/7 operation of this tram system with the revenue from the ground rents.
3) with the revenue from the ground rents, refrain from the local taxation buildings, jobs, sales, businesses, etc.
4) with the revenue from the ground rents, provide world class social services, business assistance, housing assistance, etc.

To note, I don't know what NO was worth prior to Katrina, or what rents it would fetch. I do know that Washington DC has a total assessed value of around $130B, and a market value of probably twice that. Roughly 1/4 of this value are land values, and roughly 1/4 of this value is speculative. Charging market rates for ground rents in DC would probably generate around $3 Billion a year. DC's budget is around $4B, however DC provides state level services as well. I imagine that the New Orlean's government would find that it had more money than ever. My guess is that the Federal Government could condemn the entirety of NO for less than $100B.

Likewise, failing to tax jobs, sales, & buildings means that wages would be higher and the cost of living, including housing, would be lower than they otherwise would be.

[phantom power]

7. In addition to fighting fires, you seem to know a lot about urban planning

[dcfirefighter]

8. Heh, i am a veritable repository of useless knowledge. n/t