| Page 2 of 2 < |
The Drawbacks of Demolition in New Orleans
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
When I lived in the Calliope (now the B.W. Cooper) project, it was largely transitional housing, and its working poor families were supported by social services. I remember health clinics, educational activities, recreational activities and a competent maintenance staff. But instead of services being increased when the concentration of poverty increased, they were reduced or eliminated. I believe that this contributed significantly to the conditions in the complexes before Hurricane Katrina hit.
The renovation of portions of a similar complex for what the New York Times put at "under $200 per square foot -- roughly what new construction with lesser materials would cost" -- may indicate that wholesale demolition is not necessary or warranted, but I do not believe that every building should be preserved. Most were well designed and constructed, but some were poorly constructed or maintained and should go. But the communities will not succeed, whether in renovated or replacement buildings, unless the necessary social services are available.
To focus only on buildings and not on the necessary services would really be, as The Post put it, "a prime example" of insanity.
-- David Sylvester
Arlington
