will nyc sustain this population growth, if not then???
The desire to peer into the future is a human trait as old as the biblical prophets and the oracle at Delphi. Such is the case today as the realization becomes every day more clear that the advanced economices of the world are entering a new global, information-based, post-industrial stage of development that promises new forms of urban civilization and human community. Retaining Manhattan as the epicenter of the world is the work of many minds. We all know about how Manhattan was evolved, its social structures, urban culture, how the city is organized spatially, what economic functions it perform, how it is governed, how it is planned and here I would like to discuss its possible future.
I would like to perceive Manhattan’s future in urban and sustainability context as the connection between the built environment of the city and the natural environment is very important. Since the population soars and urbanization continues, the imperative to design Manhattan as a sustainable city will become more important. One possible urban future is post-urbanism. Melvin Webber, author of “The Post-City Age argues that certain technological developments will result in an end to traditional cities and the emergence of a post-urban period of human development. The information revolution sweeping the world today has profound implications for the future of cities. Joel Kotkin argues that modern telecommunications will indeed contribute to decentralization and the “destruction of the space”. These are the dark clouds in his view of the urban future.
Thus putting forward Manhattan that was 400 years ago, at present and could/would be if the sea level rises and in the later part of blog discuss the problems the city is facing and would face in future and to some extend try to see the framed city and visualize the future of the city Manhattan in urban population and sustainability context.
Before we discuss the future i would put forward the past and present situations of NYC.
1. Composite image of Manhattan that shows the left side of the island as it was 400 years ago and the right side as it looks today.
Reference from: http://www.doobybrain.com/tag/future/
2. Mannahatta Project’s view of Mannahatta ca. 1609 overlaid with today’s footprint of Manhattan.
3. Manhattan after sea level will rise
Reference from:
Growth of Human population and its effects:
As per my perception population growth would be the root cause of all the problems New York City would/could face in the future. Its effects would be Land Scarcity, Traffic problems (Vehicular/ Human), Pollution, Sustainability, Waste and it goes on……
The world’s urban population was only 750 million in 1960, grew to 3 billion by 2002 and is expected to surpass 5 billion in 2030.
- According to the U.S. Census, Manhattan’s residential population is actually at about 1.7 million.
Whereas:
Tourism in New York City includes nearly 47 million foreign and American tourists each year.
International and domestic Visitor to New York City in 2008:
Domestic visitors in 2008: 37.1 million
International visitors in 2008: 9.5 million
Hard to believe but the ratio is 1:50 approx. (Manhattan’s Residential population: Tourist in Manhattan)
will it be able to sustain this no in future???
Image focusing on number of tourist in Times Square on New Year Eve….will New York be able to sustain the existing no of tourist in coming New year eves???
Manhattan population by day vs Manhattan population by Night.
Reference from: http://gizmodo.com/5336615/manhattans-population-by-day-vs-manhattans-population-by-night
40% of the NYC population is the immigrants and they are the lifeblood of NYC. 1 million immigarnts have come since 1990. Will nyc be able to sustain this %age. I feel that each zone/district strated to have its own identity such as china town , little italy etc…is that good??? If so what would be global identity of nycity in future???
The subway statistics:
From 8:00 am to 8:59 am on an average fall day in 2007 the NYC Subway carried 388,802 passengers into the CBD on 370 trains over 22 tracks. In other words, a train carrying 1,050 people crossed into the CBD every 6 seconds.
Reference from: http://www.mta.info/nyct/facts/ridership/index.htm#chart_s
New York City has an average density of 25,000 persons per square mile. It seems plain that the only way to stop urban crowding and to solve most of the urban problems besetting both the developed and the underdeveloped nations is to reduce the overall rate of population growth. Kingsley Davis says that there will be an end to urbanization-but not necessarily to absolute population growth, the physical size of cities or the absolute number of people cities contain. Actually the hardest problem is not that of determining the “floor” of the urban category but of ascertaining the boundary of places that are clearly urban by any definition. The urbanization of human population is continuing as per Kingsley Davis. 21st century will surely see more congestion, sprawl, pollution, exhaustion of natural resources, extinction of species and proliferation of megacities and vast urban conurbations, even if governments intervene to plan and regulate city development far more than they ever done in the past.
As long as the human population expands, Manhattan city will expand too, regardless of whether urbanization increases or declines. But my major concern is where is it going to expand as its an island??? If not horizontality than vertically??? or all island boroughs of New York city going to merging into 1 island???
The New York survey asked suburban respondents if they favored encouraging or slowing growth. The model included variables indicating the location of the respondent, whether they work in New York City, and how often they visit the city for non-work reasons.
Several of the variables in the model were found to be statistically significant:
- African-American respondents had a lower probability of supporting slow-growth measures, while being Latino had no effect on support for slowing growth.
- Older respondents were more likely to support slowing growth, perhaps because older respondents value different community characteristics or have different priorities than younger residents.
- Respondents living in areas that they feel are becoming more like a big city were more likely to support slowing growth, suggesting that a desire to escape encroaching urban ills is at the base of suburban support for slowing growth.
- Exurban respondents and suburbanites living in Connecticut were less likely to support slowing growth, while suburban respondents in New Jersey were more likely to support slowing growth.
- Working in New York did not effect attitudes on slowing growth, but respondents who visited the city more often for non-work reasons were less likely to support slowing growth.
Reference From: http://www.urbanfutures.org/abstract.cfm?id=56
Sustainability:
If we talk in present context, Empire State Building, the icon of NYC is supporting the sustainability concept, thus I feel its important for us to look forward what this scenario will be in future. Its important to prevent the island from Global warming and greenhouse gas emissions. Energy and water conservation in another criteria and all this will be effected by the population growth rate. I know its would be difficult and expensive but its better than the future effects on whole planet.
The term “sustainable” is now widely used to describe a world in which both human and natural systems can continue to exist long into the future. Urban sustainability-the ability of cities to grow and develop without overwhelming the environmental carrying capacity of the earth-have become an important feature of contemporary thinking about the future of the cities. Sustainable Urban development is defined as a development that improves the long-term social and ecological health of the cities and towns.
The transition towards more sustainable cities will not happen overnight. But through a growing ecological and social consciousness, the development of innovative models and examples, and better understandings of the policies, programs and design appropriate to urban sustainability, new, more sustainable forms of urban development can come about.
Below are couple of examples relating to the future Architecture in context to sustainability.
Reference from: http://images.google.com/imghp?hl=en&tab=wi&q=sustainable%20design%20proposal%20for%20manhattan%20future
One of the major Environmental issues in New York City is waste and that too will be effected by the population growth. New York City generates 23,600 metric tons of waste every day. The problem is in its disposal. Environmental problems have made the city reconsider its waste disposal system which consisted of 8 incinerators to burn waste and 11 landfill sites in which to dump them. Now most of the disposal takes place in a few major dump sites, including the massive (1,214 hectares) Fresh Kills Landfill on Staten Island. The question remains, where will the waste go after that site is full and closed?
Reference from:http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/habitat/profiles/newyork.asp
Hard to believe but below are few astonishing examples of the different perception as future of Manhattan’s urban development:
- Spiraling Skyscraper farms for a future Manhattan
- Dragonfly Vertical farm for a future New York
Reference from:
- Future of Green roof technology in New York City.
New York’s Central Park could be bulldozed to make way for new Manhattan Airport
Reference from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-1201334/Plans-revealed-bulldoze-Central-Park-make-way-airport-New-Yorks-Manhattan-Island.html
But what is this??? It is really astonishing for me and suppose would be for you guys too??? But why Central Park??? It’s the wonderful urban space carved out of the rigid grid planning of Manhattan city.
I would say if the above would be true than there is no doubt that this would happen in future. Refer the image below.
New York City in 2106 under catastrophic flooding conditions due to melting of ice sheets.
In the end a consideration of the many possibilities of the urban future leaves more questions than answers. Thus future is future and nothing can be said about it. Its perception of the individual and the above is mine-probable, possible and desirable urban future.
Courtesy to The city Reader Fourth Edtion edited by Richard T. LeGates and Frederic Stout
As i have referred it to put forward my ideas in context to effects on Manhattan’s Urbanization due to human population.
The City of the future – – lies in the past.
To know what kind of city New York will be in the future, you have to look to the past. The future that I am referring to is a period of less than 50 years from now, although it’s not tomorrow, next year or even the next decade. In fact, over the next few years, I envision very little change, if any in New York City, with the exception of its economy.
The New York City economy depends on the state of the national economy as well as the health of industries that are currently important to New York – - mainly financial services such as banking and Wall Street. This brings up the main point of my essay. New York City has long stopped being a manufacturing center and instead has migrated to more of a services sector. New York City used to be the capital of American manufacturing. It once had over one million manufacturing jobs as opposed to today which is less than 100,000. New York’s surviving factories face tough competition from foreign imports, and have to fight for real estate against condo developments and businesses ranging from art galleries to retail. Some examples of manufacturing still remaining include apparel and textiles, metal products, furniture and chemicals.
As a result of the diminishing manufacturing industry, as well as many other reasons, the City’s architecture went from horizontal to vertical. Manufacturing requires a broad footprint, since it is difficult to manufacture products on different floors. By contrast, services can be performed in a vertical environment – - stacking one group of people on top of another. From an architectural standpoint, the only major similarity between service and manufacturing, until about a dozen years ago, was that both required people to congregate in a common work environment. However starting around the early ‘90s, technology took a major leap forward with the formation of the Internet along with the advent of the personal computer. This not only increased the productivity of service workers, it also laid the ground work for what I think will be a major change in the way New York and many other large cities will function. This is because service people no longer need an office environment to perform their tasks. Today’s technology allows people to interact with one another from remote locations – not only in print but visually (thru webcams) as well. This is known as telecommuting. Telecommuting increases the employability of parents with small children, the disabled and people living in remote areas. It reduces an individual’s carbon footprint through lack of daily commuting. It provides flexibility and increases productivity. It provides more quality family time and less stress. It eases traffic congestion which results in less air pollution and petroleum use. The initial costs of the infrastructure are outweighed by the benefit of happy, productive employees.
With the manufacturing sector shrinking and the service sector expanding the logical outcome of this is the return of the cities of the past where people lived and worked in close proximity. The need for commuting will be sharply reduced, and along with it carbon emissions and the need for foreign oil. In short, technology will not only make workers’ lives easier it will contribute to cleaning our air and perhaps slowing the trend to global warming.
In Europe, where many cities are hundreds of years old, this trend is readily apparent. You either live in the city or you live on the farm. There’s no such thing as suburbs, exurbs or megalopolises. People either walk to work, ride a bicycle or take a bus and in some cases they work out of their domiciles. This trend toward the past that I envision is a logical outgrowth of our changing emphasis on services rather than goods, along with advances in technology and increasing congestion in central cities. Indeed looking ahead far enough one could envision the New York City of today morphing into a number of smaller cities in the future as this trend takes hold.
This breakup won’t happen right away. In the beginning, New York City will split into five cities – one for each borough. By our standards these cities will be considered small but by other folks living in other parts of the country, these cities will be considered large. In fact, they would still be too big for many people to walk or bike to work. A city as large as Brooklyn will still require either automobiles or subways to get around. But eventually these cities could be as small as Binghamton, Orangeburg or even Monticello just to name a few in New York State. If one looks far enough ahead one could envision many even smaller jurisdictions, which would have separate names but would allow for common usage of utilities and yet small enough that everything could be self contained.
With smaller cities come many advantages such as a better quality of life, more green space, more character and atmosphere, less anonymity, a feeling of belonging, less crime, less poverty and less crowding. As the population is living longer, a smaller city is more desirable for retirement.
Perhaps one could compare the idea of small cities to the polis dating back to the 5th century b.c.e. In H.D.F. Kitto’s article titled “The Polis”, the author defines the polis as a city/state or self governing community. It is a living community or extended family. The Greeks’ ideal city was 5000 people although some were as large as 20,000 people. The Greeks felt that everyone should know each other by sight. The author states that “the Greek prefers to live in a town or village to walk out to his work and to spend his rather ampler leisure talking in the town or village square”. The market became the center of communal life. Perhaps this ideal city is too small compared to the scale of New York City but we should not confuse size with significance.
In conclusion, New York City appears to be at a crossroads. The most frequently noted view is that it will expand beyond its borders going as far as Boston to the north and Washington DC to the south, thereby becoming one megalopolis. But there is another possibility that few have paid attention to but which seems to make more sense from a technological as well as an ecological point of view. That is instead of getting bigger, New York and other big cities will break up into smaller jurisdictions to reflect the growing trend to working at home or close to home. Indeed, in spite of all of the efforts of the government to tackle such issues as global warming, energy independence and clean air, if I am right, the issues may soon be resolved by the people themselves.
The Squares of New York, their individual social culture and connection to Broadway as a path
The Land of Opportunity…
New York’s Polis
In this writing, I will talk about the ‘polis’ — a form of Greek community. I will connect it to other readings from architectural and urban history and theory classes (from this semester and last semester). Lastly, I plan on connecting the reading to New York City’s urban landscape though some connections to New York’s Chinatown.
THE POLIS
Our reading suggests that the ‘polis’ neither a city, nor a town or region. The best it can state is that it is, as has been handed down, a ‘city state’ — for which we, in modern society, have no modern equivalent. My view is that we call it this, because polis like Athens and the other small communities existed for many years with its communal and social forms of ‘togetherness’.
We know from the reading that the polis was form a form of community that typically numbered over 5,000 and only in a handful of cases, numbered up to around 20,000 citizens (though slaves, women, and foreigners had no voting rights). Each of polis was a self-governing community, of men (it is theorized that while all men could vote if they chose, many may have elected not to do so and that decisions were made by a smaller group). This enabled its citizens to each have a voice in shaping the community and it’s affairs.
Beyond this, there were additional reasons that made the polis unique:
• Historical development — this type of community was a 2,000 year-old process
• Geographical location — often isolated by mountainous terrain and the sea
• Economic reasons — each polis was independent of others and self-sufficient
• Social habits — the community tended to think of itself as a ‘whole’
• Openness — though each polis had its own identity and independence, foreigners and outsiders were welcome but come the last (behind the community
CONNECTIONS TO OTHER READINGS
In absorbing the reading, I see some connections to some of our other readings from this and previous semesters. To me, the polis is shares something from Owen’s ideal communities — his cities were to be utopian models — small in size, each community self-sufficient, where everyone could be happy, and enjoy working and their life together.
I can also make a connection to how these polis communities were very much like enclaves, since each was whole and shared ‘community values’ that gave many unique characteristics.
There is a connection to size, as in the ‘Roman System’. Cities of the romans were rarely larger than 10,000 people. Wile the size was similar, the Roman System was planned according to principals to ‘make a city’ while the polis came together more as a community, almost like a modern commune.
I can even make a connection to “Contested Cities” reading. In this reading, a thing (as in city) is not made, a process makes it, thus making a thing (a city) — but isn’t the polis’ 2,000 year evolution process itself? It took Greek 2000 years to crate polises and the concept of them — a rough, long processes.
RELATIONSHIP TO NEW YORK CITY
I would like to make the argument that Chinatown in Manhattan is a ‘modern polis’. It is an ethnic enclave with population of 100,000 Chinese immigrants. Compared to the polis’ 5,000-20,000 citizens, it is very large. But, if we consider for a moment in both Roman and Greek times, that 5,000-20,000 was also considered ‘very large’— we can then compare the 100,000 in Chinatown to New York’s urban 20 million people — thus saying that it is an isolated community with it’s own social customs and economic self sufficiency, for Chinatown has it’s own voice that sets it apart as a modern polis within Manhattan. Chinatown is both a residential area and commercial area — so self-sufficient is it, that one of Chinese descent, never need leave it. Chinatown has all of the things Chinese people are accustomed to need to: food, clothing, banking, businesses, holidays, recreation and culture. This social make up of Chinatown says, “we belong to this special area, and we are Chinese, this is our place, our culture, others are welcome but they come to us as our guests.” — Much the same as a foreign visitor would have found themselves in a Greek polis.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, we can see how regardless of time or ideals, all of these thoughts come together as sharing social connections. While the polis no longer can exist in modern society, we can see that there are in essence, ‘modern polises’ in many places as ethnic enclaves.
QUESTION
Which is better? The polis recreated in today’s society, or modern planned cities?
Loading ...
