The Dangers of Overconfidence in the Wake of Hurricane Sandy
Hurricane Sandy most assuredly ranks as one of the major events that have shaped life in New York within the last 5 years. Catching us off-guard, Sandy barreled through New York causing flooding, power outages, train suspensions and generally being a massive inconvenience. All in all it cost New York around 18 billion dollars in damage and lost productivity. New Yorkers were outraged at the slow response of the government to their plight. My home was left without power for two weeks while the Long Island Power Authority (or LIPA for short) did….not much of anything really. Truly the response time was appalling for the millions left without power and it was this poor showing that prompted the privatization of LIPA under the Public Service Electric and Gas company (PSEG) after all the dust had settled.
No one wants to feel as though something of this magnitude could hit the metropolitan area again. Everyone saw the destructive and unpredictable nature of weather in 2012 and as New Yorkers we want to believe that the government has taken the necessary steps to ensure that if this type of situation happens again we will be prepared and the same level of devastation and ineptitude will not be seen. However, the reality of New York’s preparedness is not as rosy as our perceptions. As the Jorgensen article states, De Blasio talks a big game regarding how New York is ready for the next big storm but according to this article the only upgrades we’ve seen in terms of flood protection are tons of sand being dumped on beaches and some bulkheads being constructed. De Blasio celebrates the “securing” of funds for more ambitious projects such as the construction of a levee system and a gigantic earthen wall stretching along the lower east side remain in the design stages. Its not hard to imagine how these projects might be beneficial but as long as they remain in the design stages all potential benefits are firmly rooted in the theoretical.
In addition to foot-dragging with regards to preventative construction, the government also has had its flaws highlighted in the agencies tasked with recovery. As the Lipton and Moss states, Hurricane Sandy pushed the New York City Housing Authority to the limit in the wake of the destruction. They were proactive in getting citizens to leave but were rendered ineffectual after the storm had actually occurred. The city did not enforce the evacuation order and as such thousands of residents (predominantly the elderly and infirm) were stranded in their flood-damaged apartments; often without heat and electricity. The city had drafted protocols in the wake of Hurricane Katrina but had unfortunately failed to heed its own advice as residents languished in post-storm conditions.
Needless to say among those who suffered the most were the small business owners who were forced to shutter their doors after the flooding had receded, as states the McGeehan article. My aunt lost her salon on the Island and was forced to watch as all of her equipment was strewn about the now-uninhabitable space. Unemployment benefits often do not even come close to the money required to keep up the ruined storefronts and as such many people are forced to close their doors permanently. Truthfully this is one problem for which there is no clear-cut solution because this deals with issues on the microeconomic level and I doubt that there is a comprehensive solution to deal with the million individual situations this storm caused.
Overall, these articles seem to come together to form a theme of the dangers of overconfidence. We think that it should only be natural for the government to be proactive and seek solutions to the problems highlighted by Hurricane Sandy but the reality is that we aren’t as prepared as we should be four years post-storm. Those who don’t know their history are doomed to repeat it and as it stands the government is not doing their studying.
5 Comments
woo seok choi
April 5, 2016Your response was comprehensive and insightful.
When Sandy happened, I didn’t think it was all that bad. My neighborhood had some fallen trees and garbage cans, but still had power and operational stores. Reading about your personal experience and the articles, I’d say Sandy really is one of the most influential recent events in NYC.
It’s unsettling that De Blasio’s projects are still stuck in the development stages. It gives off the vibe that we’re still unprepared. I agree that the dumping of sand and construction of bulkheads along beaches isn’t the best preventative measure. But, I think these are definitely the right first steps. One of the articles mentions the possibility of relocating boiler and power rooms in apartments to above ground. This is a dumb idea; the job is expensive and, given the structure of most apartments, impossible without disrupting operations. Considering this, the idea to establish anti-flood structures along the shore seems more logical.
I agree with you that those hardest hit are small businesses. Compared to residents and housing, the local government pays much less attention to the small businesses. It’s really tragic to have your entire livelihood destroyed without any help or compensation from the city or insurance companies.
naomicameron
April 5, 2016I really appreciate the points you brought out regarding to the lack of an evacuation/ storm preparedness plan in the city. Reading the description of the hardships that citizens faced after the storm in the Lipton and Moss article, it was hard to think that the city could be as ill-prepared as the Jorgensen article suggests.
One thing you brought up that I had not considered until reading the McGeehan article was the devastating effect that the storm had on the livelihood of small businesses. ( I’m sorry to hear about your aunt’s salon.) When we consider the fact that most small businesses closed after the storm, we must be aware that we are looking at a situation that has the potential to become the plane beneath the next wave of gentrification and change. These changes can revitalize storm-depressed areas by providing with new community spaces or they can commercialize the areas the experienced the most destruction during Sandy.
Lucius Seo
April 5, 2016De Blasio’s comment seems to have a lot to do with the flashy politics more than the reality.
When de Blasio and Lhota were competing for the mayoral office, one of the strongest merits Lhota had over de Blasio was that Lhota, working for MTA, responded to the Sandy rather professionally, and many people praised him for handling the natural disaster.
When de Blasio makes such comments concerning the storm preparations, it is hard to resist the judgment that there is something presentational in his comments.
Alasdair McLean
April 12, 2016I think you captured the complexity of the issue well with your line that there isn’t a good solution to deal with the 1 million individual issues caused by Hurricane Sandy. Preparedness is easy to talk about, but much harder to take appropriate action for. It’s difficult to benchmark preparedness- At least in terms of education or government benefits, there are litmus tests to determine the effectiveness of funding. A large issue with preparedness is just that- It’s not cheap, and it’s not easy to argue for. Sure, everybody agrees we should be prepared for environmental disasters. However, it’s hard to plan for every possibility and it is inevitable that everybody’s idea of how much funding is adequate to fuel proper preparedness is very very different. Without research and studies (and honestly, how could we possibly accurately do either) that tests our preparedness, it’s very difficult to set concrete goals for ourselves and thus to argue for a discrete amount of funding. It’s a difficult, abstract topic which does nothing to simplify matters.
kevincall
April 12, 2016You touched on many different things the articles had discussed and brought in your own personal experiences which I think only added to the acknowledgement of the city’s lack of emergency preparedness. Like Woo, I personally did not get effected by the storm. My house which usually loses electricity with small storms, did not even have the lights flicker while many others on Staten Island lost their homes and possessions. I agree that these physical barriers are only a small step towards what we need to actually be prepared. Although a giant earthern wall sounds like a potentially helpful option, it only makes me question how this wall would effect water side views and what should be used as public space. The article we had read previously by Vanessa Quirk, does help relieve this worry by making this protective wall more aesthetically pleasing while also keeping the water viewable to residents of the city by being retractable, this opens up technical concerns. One can imagine that building a stationary wall would cost an arm and a leg less than a retractable wall covered with artwork of commissioned artists.
These physical barriers are needed, however, these can, and probably will fail when the city is faced with storms down the road, especially with rising global sea levels. Although Woo mentions many inconveniences with removing boilers from underground and bringing them aboveground, these measures will help considerably. Damaged boilers, that need to be replaced, as the city bureaucracy took days just to notify Ware Inc for rentals, are not as good as boilers that remained undamaged. In fact with the number of tenants that had used the resulting conditions of living post Sandy to break lease from their landlords, probably cost the landlords and building managers more money in rent and revenue than it would have cost them to reconfigure their building.