Made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 storm with 127 mph winds Almost 2,000 confirmed deaths Majority of deaths occurred in New Orleans $ billion in damages (2005 USD) Costliest hurricane in U.S. history Affected approximately 90,000 sq. miles of the United States

 The storm surge breached 53 different levees around the city  80% of the city was flooded with up to 20 feet of water  The older parts of the city, built next to more solid levees and not below sea level, were the few places not badly hit by flooding   While 80-90% of New Orleans residents were able to evacuate the night before the storm hit, the rest who did not have access to transportation or did not wish to leave were stranded  Many were trapped on or in their homes without access to clean water for days or electricity for weeks  In the city, 70% of all occupied housing units suffered damage from the hurricane and flooding  Over one-fourth reported that their house sustained damages of $15,000 or more

 FEMA = Federal Emergency Management Agency  Lack of preparation for Hurricane Katrina  Especially in New Orleans  The mayor’s very late implementation of his evacuation plan and lack of food, water, security, or sanitary conditions  Levees were just in no way prepared enough for a storm the size of Katrina  Lack of quick, strong response to flooding worsened everything  FEMA’s lack of coordination with other federal relief agencies  A failure to respond to the huge food/water emergency of stranded residents and evacuees

Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general wrote a report noting the widespread criticism over FEMA’s handling of Hurricane Katrina The criticism against FEMA is largely deserved

 Red Cross launched its largest relief effort in its 124-year history  1 st 2 weeks – 74,000 volunteers giving shelter to 160,000 evacuees  Raised about one billion dollars in cash and pledges  Feeding America  Over 33 million pounds of food specifically for Katrina relief  Salvation Army  5.6 million meals served, 3.3 million people assisted, $400 million donated

 In July 2012, the population of New Orleans had only returned to 76% of its April 2000 population (369,250 out of the original 484,674)  Although this was an increase from the loss of over 50% measured in the immediate aftermath  In the larger scope, over one million people in the Gulf Coast region were displaced  Up to 600,000 were still displaced a month later  However, this displacement was not universally felt by all groups of people  Specifically, income, race, and education level all were significant factors when looking at the people who were able to return to their home or hometowns  So, where did these people go? Other places, including…

 Lafayette, due to its more western and inland location, was for the most part spared from the path of the hurricane  However, in the city Lafayette, the issue became being able to accommodate the huge number of refugees (14,000 evacuees officially, 5,000 new permanent residents – 3.2% increase)  Hotels were at 99% occupancy for months  Residential sales increased by over 22% in 2005  The city grew rapidly, putting a huge strain on the city’s transportation and housing infrastructures, education system  Although a lot of the evacuees have left by now, many have permanently relocated (8.25% increase in overall population of Lafayette Parish)  The Parish experienced 15 years of population growth within months  This still presents the issue of supplying these new permanent residents with permanent, affordable housing

 Short-term plans  Government consolidated construction of affordable single-family homes  Ensuring that current structures are up to stand furture storm damage  Using certain lots within the Parish for temporary, affordable housing developments  Long-term plans  Ensure drainage system is completed ASAP  Continue the emphasis and growth in affordable, permanent housing construction  Ensure that the infrastructure and emergency transportation structure are able to accommodate this larger number of people  Disaster plans  Establish a centralized, consolidated center that houses resources, agencies, and individuals for human services, non-profit agencies, and/or disaster staging  Establish for both daily assistance and disaster relief

isaster/programs/details/ la_pat_hebard.aspx

 For many Katrina evacuees, especially in the city of New Orleans, their housing developments were completely demolished  However, these housing developments were not rebuilt as they previously existed  Developers wanted to prevent the recreation of the high rates of crime experienced in the low-income housing projects  The solution for developers was “mixed-income neighborhoods”  The developments were re-built with much nicer facilities, and only about 1/3 of the spots were open as public housing  The rest were sold off to families with higher incomes  In addition, a lack of initiative and drive on FEMA’s part led to temporary housing fixes becoming WAY more permanent than intended

Pros  Offering much nicer, newer housing to low- income families  More opportunities for low-income residents  Job training and counseling  Reduced the previous rate of crime in these areas Cons  Greatly limits the amount of public housing offered  Increased rent and utilities pricing in these neighborhoods even for public housing  Does not recreate the sense of community felt by previous residents  Poor and/or black residents were much less likely to return

com/releases/2008/04/ htm

 What should housing developers be focused on?  Maximizing the amount of evacuees that can return?  Attempting to recreate the sense of community and culture which previously existed?  Attempt to create a safe, economically fruitful housing development?  Recreate the demographics of the community previously living there?  Focus on permanent housing style residences or more temporary renting residences?  Acting quickly or acting effectively?  These are all very big questions that we should attempt to find out what exactly Lafayette did/is attempting to do with their housing developments  “Challenging Service” – ABP’s motto