i mostly agree with this guy. the evacuation of people from the most danger-prone areas went very well: galveston and the coastal areas were about 90 percent cleared out, and help was provided to the poor and the elderly to leave. katrina scared a lot of people, and many of those who lived in areas not under a mandatory evacuation order decided to leave anyway. i think things could have gone more smoothly, but absent a means to move people in large numbers (an extensive commuter rail system, for example), i don't think the gridlock traffic problem could have been avoided.
clearly, large cities need to go back and re-examine their disaster management plans. katrina was a disaster because of new orleans' peculiar geography and the slow response in the aftermath of the storm. NOLA was the equivalent of galveston in terms of its vulnerability. it also had a fraction of the population of houston, which is the 4th largest city in the country. there are limitations to government effectiveness, and i'm not convinced that heads need to roll for the rita effort. i think most of the costs will be in dollars and not in lives.
Saturday, September 24, 2005
A Houston Resident Speaks
Posted by
emily1
at
3:40 p.m.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment