Written by YeSeul Kim
Week 1-Week 5
This was a research period in which the
individual groups
investigated general information about their topics and how the data
pertained
and affected New Orleans.
We also gathered input from speakers of different areas of expertise.
Week 5-Week 8
The coordination meetings began and so did
the interaction
between teams. At this point, many in the class wanted to rebuild much,
if not
all of New Orleans.
This is when the class realized that there was not enough data to
support any
ideas.
Team 2 presented the “North Shore Plan,”
which suggested
converting New Orleans into an
industrial and
tourist city and move residential areas across Lake
Pontchartrain. This commuter city idea seemed feasible and
exists
in other great cities such as New
York City. Ultimately, this idea was abandoned
due to
demographics issues,
Week 9-Week 10
The class decided to look into the “North
Shore Plan.” After
researching, the only thing the class agreed on was that we disagreed.
Saturday meetings emerged and groups of
Terrascope students
began researching into other solutions to New Orleans.
Week 11-Week 12
Many of our mentors suggested quantifying
our data to use as
our support for any solution that we choose. Consequently, the
“Algorithm” emerged.
The purpose of the survey is to create a mathematical representation of
what
the entire class views as the most important factors for rebuilding.
The
ranking of importance of each factor was determined by a survey
conducted to
the class. By doing it survey-style, the final weighting system was the
compilation of the entire class’ opinions on what is important in
rebuilding
decisions. The index gives scores for each factor to each neighborhood.
It
gives us a way to compare (for example, % damage to an elevation height
in feet)
by giving each an index score of 0-10. The derivations of the index
number for
each factor in rebuilding are given below, and were based on the
overall
numbers for the area. A 10 in any given category represents the best
situation
for rebuilding; 0 is the worst. For each neighborhood, the index score
received
for each category will be multiplied by the weight of that category
(percentage
in decimal form), and the final score for each neighborhood will be the
sum of
the weighted scores for each category. Ultimately, this was only used
to
compare neighborhoods and was never applied in determining the fate of
each
neighborhood because we realized that the index was very arbitrary.
Week 12-13
An alternative to the “North Shore Plan” was
Baton Rouge.
The theory
was that if we moved the port jobs from New Orleans
to the port in Baton Rouge,
then the residents would move accordingly. The geographical advantage
of moving
the New Orleans economy to Baton Rouge is
that it evades the immediate
threat of subsidence and sea level rise. A lot of this idea has been
incorporated in the final solution.
Week 13
One alternative plan was to increase the
elevation of New Orleans
by covering
the area with a thick layer of dirt. However, it was agreed that this
plan was
not feasible. For one thing, such a strategy would require many
buildings to be
taken down while a layer of sediment was added, and then rebuilt on top
of the
sediment. This would greatly increase the cost of rebuilding.
Furthermore, due
to subsidence and sea level rise, such a plan would only prolong the
inevitable.
Another option was to simply not rebuild any
of New Orleans.
This plan,
however, would incur massive costs, both economically and socially. The
majority of citizens of New Orleans
and, indeed,
the rest of the United
States, would not support such a plan.
New Orleans is simply too
important to the economy and
culture of the United
States,
and the sheer volume of residents who would be displaced if such action
were
taken makes the plan unfeasible.