Commercial networks need hardening
The thing to remember about a commercial network is that its first priority is to make money - as such, all decisions are guided by "will this maximize profits?". So, decisions like site location, backup power, fuel for the backup power, tower structure, etc. are all made with the idea that once the expense of "doing it better" exceeds the projected payoff in increased income, you stop.
Public safety networks are not (or at least, should not be) profit oriented. They can say "no, that site, while cheaper, is less able to survive the disasters we have in this area than this other, more expensive site, so we choose the more expensive site." They can insist upon stronger towers, larger generators, greater fuel stocks, more frequent tests of the generator, etc. than a commercial site, because the commercial site operator will decide that a certain amount of down-time is cheaper than preventing it.
In Katrina, many commercial sites failed because the towers were overloaded with antennas (more antennas on a tower := more $$$, but also more wind-load). Many more failed because they had enough fuel for a few hours - enough to last over a normal power failure event, or enough allow a fuel truck to be dispatched in normal conditions, but not enough when all the infrastructure is down. Many more failed because the emergency systems were not tested on a regular basis (testing your gen-set puts hours on the clock, burns fuel, requires you to change the oil, etc.)