[StBernard] Duany meeting

[Westley Annis]

> Jer...I again agree with you...I have said this...again and again but you

have said it much more eloquently...

CLM



> -----------------------------------------------------

> 

>  There are genuine, first come, first address issues when considering 

> a NEW

> CITY/Parish:

> 

> Suppose we had these designers a few years ago and things were 

> completed/built up a few feet so that we can get insurance. Then 

> Katrina comes along in 2005 with 30 ft. storm surges, tops/breaches the

levees.

> (even suppose the storm was incredibly stronger than Katrina). Now the 

> new city/parish is inundated with the same swamp water, this time 2 

> feet below the ceilings. Same result. Destroyed.

> 

> No addressing MRGO, stronger, higher levees NOW before a redesign can 

> mean the above scenario. Wasted monies, energies and lives.

> 

> Secondly, if money is not given to the unfortuate firstly (as in all 

> probability, these were working class as the well-2-do had the means 

> for superior coverage, perhaps), then let them go on with their lives 

> here or elsewhere would be first priority. In St. Bernard Parish, 

> there were average/mean income of perhaps $22,000 or less. Hardly a 

> parish to attract the best of malls, theaters, new car dealers, huge 

> 25+ story business buildings, and great infrastructure dealings and 

> entertainment. Some will argue that bedroom communities are needed to 

> avoid riff-raff and Fat City biz overcrowdedness, then one trades

entertainment for sleep chambers.

> 

> All this design, and keeping homes in designed areas? How would this 

> be accomplished? Not everyone in every neighborhood in Chalmette, for 

> example is leaving. Build and redesign around their property? It's 

> almost as if every home would need to be razed to design properly. 

> These people, for the most part has lost everything, and re-designing 

> their homes (especially fixed-income owners isn't offered the 

> privilege unless helped by that congress act.

> 

> To settle firstly with those needed to move on seems most important 

> while decisions are made to ignore or address MRGO and the safety of the

area.

> Without being secure --new, more modern, devestating storms could be 

> on the horizon. The chicken or the egg? Save the chicken firstly. 

> Then, when she decides to have her eggs, they will more secure than 

> the eggs left without the hen sitting atop it.

> 

> Maybe not a joke than a dream--whether we're expecting a Utopia or 

> ignoring reality. I don't think I can live with 6 feet of water in my 

> home rather than the 12 feet it got. It's unacceptable, realizing my 

> street had never been flooded with water beyond the curb in the worse of

May floods.

> 

> Priority 1. Stop the chance of future floods as with "Katrina". We 

> can't take another one and smile with sincerity.

> Priority 2. If we cannot guaranteed that we can stop a 3-5 Cat Storm, 

> why bother knowing the outcome/misery.

> Priority 3. If we can guarantee (and who can?) yet another catstrophe 

> which ruined St. Bernard to this point, then we can go ahead to create 

> the best St. Bernard Parish that pales Florida's reconstruction.

> Priority 4. Do nothing as the above 3 has the answers. Return the area 

> to pre-1700 century St. Bernard.

> 

> Jer.

>