The “New” New Orleans: The Debate Continues

“If you were looking for a place expressly designed to endanger people and property, it would look a lot like New Orleans,” writes opinion columnist Stephen Chapman.

Granted, it was a “unique and wonderful creation” while it lasted, but that day has passed and “whatever comes next will not be the same,” he contends.

That again raises the question: What form will the “new” New Orleans take?

It’s an issue that provided an intriguing topic of debate in the Saturday, Sept 10 New York Times Opinion-Editorial section.

To a great extent, Craig E. Colton, a Louisiana State University professor of geology, agrees with Chapman. Colton, author of “An Unnatural Metropolis: Wresting New Orleans from Nature,” concedes that rebuilding the city as it was before the storm “would deal a cruel injustice to those who suffered the most in recent days.”

Indeed, New Orleans has faced the prospect of flooding for more than three centuries and always will --- which is why city planners, he argues, should work with nature rather than against it by restoring the marshes around New Orleans as they were before 1700. These wetlands absorbed the overflow of Lake Pontchartrain and protected the rest of the city.

Taking an even less sanguine view is former U.S. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt.

“New Orleans,” he contends, “will survive only as an island surrounded by miles of open water.” Building this scaled down “American Venice” version of New Orleans will require a colossal effort led by many of the nation’s “best scientists, engineers and city planners.”

That’s only the start. Considerable time also must be taken to redesign the city to function as an island --- one “with an island infrastructure, including relocated streets, highways and utilities,” Babbitt says.

Holding a far more optimistic view is Duke University Professor Henry Petrovski, author of “Pushing the Limits: New Adventures in Engineering.”

New Orleans’ salvation, Pertrovski believes, lies with technology that has been used time and again for more than a century to elevate cities prone to flooding from adjoining rivers and even seas.

Galveston, Tex., for example, was raised by as much as 17 feet and protected by a great seawall following a devastating flood in 1900. Likewise, the Japanese built an artificial island off Osaka to support Kansai International Airport --- replete with a terminal building that can be raised as the earth settles beneath.

Raising the city’s height, though, isn’t the only alternative. The Dutch, after all, have constructed more than 10,000 miles of dikes and other barriers to contend with overflow and are even experimenting with other alternatives to terrain modification, such as “houses that can float like houseboats.”

“Industrial buildings can be similarly designed, and the principle of buoyancy places no inherent limits on the size of such structures,” Petrovski writes.

Posted by Jim Langcuster at September 13, 2005 11:12 AM | TrackBack