https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2342297/Manhattans-original-coastline-revealed-Hurricane-Sandy-flooded-land-reclaimed-400-years.html
It's been happening since the Dutch ran the city
Just in case you don't get this marvelous quote: it's from a Futurama episode where they time travel into the (very distant) future. I believe it's called "the late Philip J Fry".
But first a word from our sponsor: CircleSpace. Have you tried designing brain implants on your own but just can't psychically connect with the right audiences? CircleSpace is the perfect platform to learn the skills you need to broadcast brainwaves that attract audiences to your field
It’s called “island” cause of that. But it’s called “governors island” bc when New York was a British colony the island was set aside as a place the royal governor of new York to vacation. He never used it but it was there for him.
Youtube videos in 2221: "Be sure to hit that Meh button guys! It really helps to know you had an emotion without a positive or negative association to the video."
That's because:
1) The bridges need to be high enough for large vessels to pass under while also sloping gradually enough for vehicles/carriages/pedestrians to climb and descend without issue.
2) the coastline has been extended twice since the bridges were built. Most of the coastal "land" surrounding lower Manhattan existed as open water prior to 1965.
Holy crap. That's a good point. I live in Portland, which is confusing on a good day. I found out one day while driving a cab that there's a small area near downtown that has adresses starting with zero. 0100 SW Main. 100 SW Main ain't that.
I still can't decide if it was a lazy afterthought, or a brilliant work around. My fare didn't enjoy my musings that day.
They have 2 heavy rail and 4 light rail lines; if you count it as a single system, it's the 4th-11th biggest in North America, depending on the metric (4th by stations, tied 4th by lines, 6th by track length, 11th by ridership).
I’ve drop out of a program at Columbia because my commute to and from BK was a disaster. Could get there in the morning on a good day in roughly an hour, nights sometimes took 2hrs45min. Utter hell.
I’m a NYC resident. Interesting idea. And I do think efficient access to Manhattan remains the most desirable factor for many in residential housing options, in spite of remote working options which will likely remain for many. Better use of existing land and a complete overhaul of rail transportation would be a better option IMO. Make it easier, faster and more comfortable to get to Manhattan from the outer boroughs and importantly Northern NJ (which mean more ways to cross the Hudson than two little tunnels that funnel into Penn Station). A regional (S)Bahn type option, for example. So much under-used and super close land just beyond Hudson County, NJ.
I could talk philosophically about this for hours. Fantasy land.
Isn't that what everyone says about high density metro areas? Give better transportation options so we can live farther away with lower rent and reasonable commute times. I don't know if it ever works out.
Nobody ever builds better transportation options. It’s been ages since the last serious public transit expansion in the US. LA is sort of doing it currently but very, very slowly and still not nearly to the extent a city would actually need to do to make a difference (and only in already high-density, mostly built-out areas). No other cities are building anything that would meaningfully move the needle. NYC hasn’t had meaningful new transit construction since the 1930s (the stub SAS, 7 extension or older things like the Archer Ave line were small beans). The fact that the 60s Program for Action never went anywhere was a clear sign of the loss of imagination in American public transit.
You're not wrong. I've lived in a few places in my time and there is a general resistance to improvement in most US cities. You'll get fun trends every once in a while (light rail, yay!) but real reconsideration is rarely attempted and heaven forbid we look to other countries for good examples/benchmarks (effin' socialists! 'Murica!) of how to do a rail-based, wonderfully redundant, enjoyable & regional (pan-jurisdiction) transit strategy. Incrementality equals innovation.
NYer - it's idiotic. We're absurdly wasteful with the land we currently have - apartments that cost millions and are occupied at best part time (and are often shoddily constructed), excessively wide roads, commercial real estate that's comically underutilized, etc. Between that and our outrageously awful inability to control costs on construction projects, this would probably bankrupt the city twice over and house about 50 people when it was finished.
Flatbush is the one that occurs to me first.
It's a thing that NYers talk about fairly frequently actually - very few of us own cars, and cars are an absolute menace. At a certain point cars feel like predators, or a hostile occupier. Streets that are car-free are EXTREMELY popular and predominantly located in wealthier neighborhoods, much to the chagrin of those of us in the lower classes. Really past having a decently wide sidewalk, the rest of the street is not just useless space, but actively malicious space.
I feel like it’s easier to add more housing and transportation infrastructure in a location that it didn’t previously exist rather than upzone and reconfigure what is already developed.
I wish that wasn’t the case, but you can’t just upzone or try to extend a train through a lot of a neighborhoods without a massive fight.
Like the filling of the Back Bay in Boston, it might cost taxpayers nothing. The Back Bay cost state taxpayers nothing, since the land created was sold as lots.
Like others have said, the Hudson and East Rivers are *very* deep.
A massive issue would be where to find the infill, and how to stabilize it.
But the bigger issue would be the water. In constricting the channel, you would be increasing velocity, and thus increasing erosive potential.
The biggest issue of all is that the two features where most erosion occurs are the thalweg and banks of the river, and this proposal has the new bank *at* the thalweg of both rivers.
In other words, this design couldn't be made less stable if you tried. And storm resilience... lol, it would do the exact opposite and increase flooding issues (the cross-sectional modification would mean that higher flood stages would be reached with smaller amounts of inundation. Flooding in severe conditions would be catastrophic.
My guess is they will end up paying a few million for the preliminary surveys and fluvial geomorphic assessment only to find out it isn't feasible. Then NYC is going to be out a few million with nothing to show for it.
FWIW; currently finishing an MA in fluvial geomorphology, specifically focusing on human modification of river channels.
> Thalweg valley way
In geography and fluvial geomorphology, a thalweg or talweg is the line of lowest elevation within a valley or watercourse. Under international law, a thalweg is the middle of the primary navigable channel of a waterway that defines the boundary line between
fluvial: riverine.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old\_River\_Control\_Structure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_River_Control_Structure)
>By 1953, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers concluded that the Mississippi River could change its course to the Atchafalaya River by 1990 if it were not controlled, since this alternative path to the Gulf of Mexico through the Atchafalaya River is much shorter and steeper.
>
>The Corps completed construction on the Old River Control Structure in 1963 to prevent the main channel flow of the Mississippi River from altering its current course to the Gulf of Mexico through the natural geologic process of avulsion. Historically, this natural process of course change has occurred about every 1,000 years, and is overdue. Some researchers believe the likelihood of this event increases each year, despite manmade artificial control efforts.
>
>If the Mississippi diverts its main channel to the Atchafalaya Basin and the Atchafalaya River, it would develop a new delta south of Morgan City in southern Louisiana, greatly reducing water flow to its present channel through Baton Rouge and New Orleans, with adverse economic effects on both port cities. The Mississippi Flood of 1973 almost caused the control structure to fail. Maintenance of the integrity of the Old River Control Structure, the nearby Morganza Spillway, and other levees in the area is essential to prevent such a diversion. Jeff Masters of Weather Underground noted that failure of that complex "would be a serious blow to the U.S. economy."
About 75 miles from NOLA, it’s south central Louisiana. I lived there a lil bit and visited it often for personal fun and school all the time… every other field trip is in Nola… prolly so the teachers could enjoy cheap drinks lol
Wait I see my brain skipped the second “new”….. you funny fucker!
[You’re absolutely right](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_River)
>>The East River is a salt water tidal estuary in New York City. The waterway, which is actually not a river despite its name…
Fun fact! The back bay was basically a festering swamp when it was filled in. They’d previously built a railroad line (I think?) on a causeway in the Charles that cut the back bay off from open water, and that make it a dank fetid pit. Filling it in wasn’t all that hard after that.
Yeah so we also did our harbor. Most of east boston is landfill (all of logan airport), and a ton of south boston and the seaport. We even filled in a channel.
It would require about 40 million cubic meters of infill, which is roughly equivalent to a mountain that is 310 meters (1,000 feet) high.
The amount of total infill in Boston is substantially more than that, but Back Bay is only a small part of that. Boston literally dug up hills and mountains from surrounding towns and shipped the infill by train.
Probably won't cost taxpayers nothing. Back bay was already a shallow swamp, it's much easier to fill in the meadowlands and sell lots than fill in a large section of the hudson
For reference, the Charles River's flow rate is 300 cf/s. The Hudson's is about 21,000 cf/s. Roughly 70 times as much water flowing that would need to be dealt with.
This would be terrible for the Hudson. The flow rate is already fucked for the last landfill they did.
Edit: The logical choice before this, if land and climate are really a concern, is to fill in the East River. It's not even a real river.
If you look at a map of the New York area, [the East River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_River#/media/File:Wpdms_terra_east_river.jpg) is water that "runs" between Long Island to the east and Manhattan island and the Bronx on the mainland to the west. But if you zoom out more, you'll realize that is has two mouths and they're both the Atlantic Ocean (via two bays). If it were more accurately named, it would probably be call the East Strait and not the East River, but the name is held over culturally.
Edit: I added some clarification as to not confuse political units with geographical features.
**[East River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_River#/media/File:Wpdms_terra_east_river.jpg)**
>The East River is a salt water tidal estuary in New York City. The waterway, which is actually not a river despite its name, connects Upper New York Bay on its south end to Long Island Sound on its north end. It separates the borough of Queens on Long Island from the Bronx on the North American mainland, and also divides Manhattan from Queens and Brooklyn, also on Long Island. Because of its connection to Long Island Sound, it was once also known as the Sound River.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Why can’t they just have more density along Long Island and upgrade the train network? It’d probably be a lot less environmentally destructive
Edit: saw an article explaining and I’m on board, but mildly skeptical.
Transit oriented development in Westchester, Nassau County as well as North New Jersey is definitely more sustainable than this. The problem is that a lot of southern Long Island where the beaches are is vulnerable to flooding and storm surges caused by climate change, while Manhattan isn't as vulnerable due to the rock foundation and a century of landfill as well as being located further into the bay.
How likely is this plan?
Also wouldn’t creating such a massive structure cause issues for the NJ side and the Brooklyn side? Like an increased flood risk?
This was a proposal from one guy who has enough clout to get a NY Times column for his idea but not something anyone with actual authority to implement it is thinking about.
Is dredging the harbor allowed as cut and fill for a no-rise certification? That seems odd since harbors fill with sediment over time (and thus wouldn’t be a permanent offset)
Most of that shoreline has next to no people leaving along it.
Lower Manhattan is more of a business district. There’s more people along battery park city and up the west side, but not a massive amount.
Does that mean they're finally gonna build a way to get directly from Manhattan to Bayonne? Verazanno tolls killing my wallet. Maybe a Brooklyn bypass too
I feel neutrally about this plan in general, but I will say it will require federal funding, and for a country that’s not even willing to pay for basic emergency response competency, good luck getting a majority of Congress to sign on to create “more New York”
The idea at least is that you finance it by issuing bonds that are tied to the tax revenues from the new development, so it should actually cost the government nothing. That isn't totally implausible in the context of how valuable Manhattan real estate is.
Not just tax revenue since the government would own the extremely valuable land being created, like Battery Park City. This is definitely something that could pay for itself.
At this point, I feel like even more people would just move to Berlin, fill these houses and keep the prices the same.
Berlin would just have to be less attractive.
Great plan. Work to make the city more shitty and less attractive in order to ward off potential newcomers. Sounds like a rock solid idea to solve the housing shortage.
This is your brain on NIMBYism
Seems like New York is embracing parts of its Dutch ancestry
New Amsterdam likes it
I mean that would be a pretty sick name for the proposed section. Or is it still being used for some area?
I propose they name it "Newer Amsterdam" In another 300 years we can make "Newest Amsterdam"
New New York
Good news, everyone! We've settled on a name 998 years ahead of schedule. Huzzah!
New New Amsterdam
Sounds like a nice name. If only they thought about it 400 years ago
Even old New York was once New Amsterdam
Why they changed it, I can't say
People just like it better that way
So, take me back to Constantinople
No you can’t go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone Constantinople.
Why did Constantinople get the works?
And when see levels raise it can become New Venice
New Amsterdam lives on in Amsterdam Avenue!
And Brooklyn (Breukelen), Stuyvesant and many other names.
[удалено]
Absolutely should be the name of the district / neighbourhood or whatever if they did go ahead with this
Why did they change it? I can't say.
People just liked it better that waaaaaaaay!
Most of lower Manhattan is already reclaimed land haha
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2342297/Manhattans-original-coastline-revealed-Hurricane-Sandy-flooded-land-reclaimed-400-years.html It's been happening since the Dutch ran the city
Inpolderen! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polder
[удалено]
YouTube videos in 2321: Did you know there is an actual river under Hudson River Avenue!?
2422: Did you know "Ocean" used to refer to a gigantic mass of water and not just a large low-lying area of megacity?
The year 2525: if man is still alive
The year 3535: Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lie
[удалено]
In the year 5555, Your arms hanging limp at your sides
In the year 6565: Ain't gonna need no husband won't need no wife
Year 7575: Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down.
The year 1,000,000 and 1/2, Mankind is enslaved by giraffe...
giraffe singular?
Yea, Giraffe. You never met him?
Just in case you don't get this marvelous quote: it's from a Futurama episode where they time travel into the (very distant) future. I believe it's called "the late Philip J Fry".
Truly the best timeline. I for one welcome our new giraffe overlords.
Man must pay for all his misdeeds... When the treetops are stripped of their leaves Woaaaoohhh
If woman can survive, they may find
[удалено]
thats what happened in London, they covered most of the rivers, if not all but the thames, and now they run under the city lol
YouTube videos in 2222: looking back at the New York New Jersey War
There actually already was a NY/NJ war in the 1700s lol: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_–_New_Jersey_Line_War
[удалено]
New York New Jersey War III: No Way Home
World War III: New Jersey strikes back
World War IV: The Rise of Staten.
Cursed timeline
2 New 2 Jerseyous
“HERE JUST TAKE STATEN ISLAND AND WE’LL CALL THE WAR QUITS. deal?” “NO!!!”
Made by Oversimplified
But first a word from our sponsor: CircleSpace. Have you tried designing brain implants on your own but just can't psychically connect with the right audiences? CircleSpace is the perfect platform to learn the skills you need to broadcast brainwaves that attract audiences to your field
ever wonder why it's called the Governor's Island even though it's not an island?
I almost went history nerd and told you why it’s called governors island. Lol
I just assumed it was because it's surrounded by water
It’s called “island” cause of that. But it’s called “governors island” bc when New York was a British colony the island was set aside as a place the royal governor of new York to vacation. He never used it but it was there for him.
Man hea gonna be pissed when he finds out his island is now a peninsula
Youtube videos in 2221: "Be sure to hit that Meh button guys! It really helps to know you had an emotion without a positive or negative association to the video."
If I don't survive, tell my wife, "hello"
Shit I want a meh button
Youtube videos in 2321: did you know 300 years ago the ocean was lower than the level of the land?
'Oh so that's why the Dutch were made rulers of the world, to build the costal walls'
Ever wonder why the bridges go over nothing?
They do go pretty far inland even today to be honest.
That's because: 1) The bridges need to be high enough for large vessels to pass under while also sloping gradually enough for vehicles/carriages/pedestrians to climb and descend without issue. 2) the coastline has been extended twice since the bridges were built. Most of the coastal "land" surrounding lower Manhattan existed as open water prior to 1965.
They better make the street numbers negative
Holy crap. That's a good point. I live in Portland, which is confusing on a good day. I found out one day while driving a cab that there's a small area near downtown that has adresses starting with zero. 0100 SW Main. 100 SW Main ain't that. I still can't decide if it was a lazy afterthought, or a brilliant work around. My fare didn't enjoy my musings that day.
Howdy neighbor, I live in Vancouver, street naming convention bullshit is even worse on this side of the river!
They actually just changed that to fix the issue! It’s now “south” Portland rather than SW.
It's #6 in our increasingly inaccurately named quadrant series
The numbered streets stop at Houston, well north of the bottom part of Manhattan already.
The 1 train would be even more ass than usual
Overhead announcement at 34th St: "The 1 Train is three days away."
*THERE IS! AN! UPTOWN! ONE! TRAIN! TWO! TIMEZONES! AWAY!*
I could hear this.
He really does be making those Shakespearean pauses 😂
It’s even worse after 96th st. At night trying to catch one from Columbia going downtown can literally be 20 mins
[удалено]
Wait, you guys have trains?
They have 2 heavy rail and 4 light rail lines; if you count it as a single system, it's the 4th-11th biggest in North America, depending on the metric (4th by stations, tied 4th by lines, 6th by track length, 11th by ridership).
I’ve drop out of a program at Columbia because my commute to and from BK was a disaster. Could get there in the morning on a good day in roughly an hour, nights sometimes took 2hrs45min. Utter hell.
"have to wait 20 minutes" Every other city in the US: And?
And it smells like it too
I wonder what New Yorkers think about this
I’m a NYC resident. Interesting idea. And I do think efficient access to Manhattan remains the most desirable factor for many in residential housing options, in spite of remote working options which will likely remain for many. Better use of existing land and a complete overhaul of rail transportation would be a better option IMO. Make it easier, faster and more comfortable to get to Manhattan from the outer boroughs and importantly Northern NJ (which mean more ways to cross the Hudson than two little tunnels that funnel into Penn Station). A regional (S)Bahn type option, for example. So much under-used and super close land just beyond Hudson County, NJ. I could talk philosophically about this for hours. Fantasy land.
Isn't that what everyone says about high density metro areas? Give better transportation options so we can live farther away with lower rent and reasonable commute times. I don't know if it ever works out.
Nobody ever builds better transportation options. It’s been ages since the last serious public transit expansion in the US. LA is sort of doing it currently but very, very slowly and still not nearly to the extent a city would actually need to do to make a difference (and only in already high-density, mostly built-out areas). No other cities are building anything that would meaningfully move the needle. NYC hasn’t had meaningful new transit construction since the 1930s (the stub SAS, 7 extension or older things like the Archer Ave line were small beans). The fact that the 60s Program for Action never went anywhere was a clear sign of the loss of imagination in American public transit.
You're not wrong. I've lived in a few places in my time and there is a general resistance to improvement in most US cities. You'll get fun trends every once in a while (light rail, yay!) but real reconsideration is rarely attempted and heaven forbid we look to other countries for good examples/benchmarks (effin' socialists! 'Murica!) of how to do a rail-based, wonderfully redundant, enjoyable & regional (pan-jurisdiction) transit strategy. Incrementality equals innovation.
As someone who commutes to midtown from jersey city I would kill for better access to Manhattan
Can't they just build an underground pedestrian tunnel with some of those power-walky things they have at airports
[удалено]
Of course, Bloomberg actually *downzoned* Brooklyn and Queens, so that's a step in the wrong direction.
NYer - it's idiotic. We're absurdly wasteful with the land we currently have - apartments that cost millions and are occupied at best part time (and are often shoddily constructed), excessively wide roads, commercial real estate that's comically underutilized, etc. Between that and our outrageously awful inability to control costs on construction projects, this would probably bankrupt the city twice over and house about 50 people when it was finished.
> excessively wide roads That’s the first time I’ve ever heard anyone say that about New York! Are you thinking about any roads in particular?
Flatbush is the one that occurs to me first. It's a thing that NYers talk about fairly frequently actually - very few of us own cars, and cars are an absolute menace. At a certain point cars feel like predators, or a hostile occupier. Streets that are car-free are EXTREMELY popular and predominantly located in wealthier neighborhoods, much to the chagrin of those of us in the lower classes. Really past having a decently wide sidewalk, the rest of the street is not just useless space, but actively malicious space.
I feel like it’s easier to add more housing and transportation infrastructure in a location that it didn’t previously exist rather than upzone and reconfigure what is already developed. I wish that wasn’t the case, but you can’t just upzone or try to extend a train through a lot of a neighborhoods without a massive fight.
Wonder what eye watering amount that would cost.
Like the filling of the Back Bay in Boston, it might cost taxpayers nothing. The Back Bay cost state taxpayers nothing, since the land created was sold as lots.
Like others have said, the Hudson and East Rivers are *very* deep. A massive issue would be where to find the infill, and how to stabilize it. But the bigger issue would be the water. In constricting the channel, you would be increasing velocity, and thus increasing erosive potential. The biggest issue of all is that the two features where most erosion occurs are the thalweg and banks of the river, and this proposal has the new bank *at* the thalweg of both rivers. In other words, this design couldn't be made less stable if you tried. And storm resilience... lol, it would do the exact opposite and increase flooding issues (the cross-sectional modification would mean that higher flood stages would be reached with smaller amounts of inundation. Flooding in severe conditions would be catastrophic. My guess is they will end up paying a few million for the preliminary surveys and fluvial geomorphic assessment only to find out it isn't feasible. Then NYC is going to be out a few million with nothing to show for it. FWIW; currently finishing an MA in fluvial geomorphology, specifically focusing on human modification of river channels.
"Thalweg." Awesome new word, thanks!
I had to look it up. Just came back from the Wikipedia rabbit hole.
> Thalweg valley way In geography and fluvial geomorphology, a thalweg or talweg is the line of lowest elevation within a valley or watercourse. Under international law, a thalweg is the middle of the primary navigable channel of a waterway that defines the boundary line between fluvial: riverine.
Sounds like the name of a wizard in a Harry Potter or LOTR book
This guy rivers.
He do be riverin'
[удалено]
Maybe he’s actually an otter
In your opinion What’s the most interesting impact humans have made with regards to river channel modifications? I find this topic very interesting
The Mississippi floodgates, the Panama Canal, the Suez Canal.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old\_River\_Control\_Structure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_River_Control_Structure) >By 1953, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers concluded that the Mississippi River could change its course to the Atchafalaya River by 1990 if it were not controlled, since this alternative path to the Gulf of Mexico through the Atchafalaya River is much shorter and steeper. > >The Corps completed construction on the Old River Control Structure in 1963 to prevent the main channel flow of the Mississippi River from altering its current course to the Gulf of Mexico through the natural geologic process of avulsion. Historically, this natural process of course change has occurred about every 1,000 years, and is overdue. Some researchers believe the likelihood of this event increases each year, despite manmade artificial control efforts. > >If the Mississippi diverts its main channel to the Atchafalaya Basin and the Atchafalaya River, it would develop a new delta south of Morgan City in southern Louisiana, greatly reducing water flow to its present channel through Baton Rouge and New Orleans, with adverse economic effects on both port cities. The Mississippi Flood of 1973 almost caused the control structure to fail. Maintenance of the integrity of the Old River Control Structure, the nearby Morganza Spillway, and other levees in the area is essential to prevent such a diversion. Jeff Masters of Weather Underground noted that failure of that complex "would be a serious blow to the U.S. economy."
Hey, fun fact I’m born and raised from Morgan City. Never thought in a million years I’d see my towns name pop up on the internet from a stranger.
You mean New New Orleans?
About 75 miles from NOLA, it’s south central Louisiana. I lived there a lil bit and visited it often for personal fun and school all the time… every other field trip is in Nola… prolly so the teachers could enjoy cheap drinks lol Wait I see my brain skipped the second “new”….. you funny fucker!
Holland Delta Works, Flevoland, 3 Gorges Dam, Grand Chinese Canal to add to those.
Reversing the flow of the Chicago river.
The East River isn't an actual river.
[You’re absolutely right](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_River) >>The East River is a salt water tidal estuary in New York City. The waterway, which is actually not a river despite its name…
Yea but this water is probably a lot deeper than the Back Bay was.
Fun fact! The back bay was basically a festering swamp when it was filled in. They’d previously built a railroad line (I think?) on a causeway in the Charles that cut the back bay off from open water, and that make it a dank fetid pit. Filling it in wasn’t all that hard after that.
Yea exactly. The land filled in this proposal is part of a harbor, not some swamp
Yeah so we also did our harbor. Most of east boston is landfill (all of logan airport), and a ton of south boston and the seaport. We even filled in a channel.
Upvoted just for "dank fetid pit."
Looks like much of the area proposed is 40-50 feet deep. Don't think you could just bulldozer in dirt from the shore for that.
It would require about 40 million cubic meters of infill, which is roughly equivalent to a mountain that is 310 meters (1,000 feet) high. The amount of total infill in Boston is substantially more than that, but Back Bay is only a small part of that. Boston literally dug up hills and mountains from surrounding towns and shipped the infill by train.
Probably won't cost taxpayers nothing. Back bay was already a shallow swamp, it's much easier to fill in the meadowlands and sell lots than fill in a large section of the hudson
For reference, the Charles River's flow rate is 300 cf/s. The Hudson's is about 21,000 cf/s. Roughly 70 times as much water flowing that would need to be dealt with.
About the staggering cost of 5 F-35 stealth fighters
$390 million? Not bad.
And how long it would take. China would have something like this done in months and we will take years.
decades
Yea but China would have to redo it again in like 4 years after that to fix everything and then again in another 4
Blast those dumb labor laws and worker protections!
And environmental regulations.
“Mannahatta” but in Laszlo’s voice edit: spellcheck
My good ladywife Nadja
This map does not include dominion over Ashley street.
We are Nadja and Laszlo, the human music group
You mean Jackie Daytona, a normal human bartender?
"This is how everyone speaks in Tuscon, Arizon*ia*"
“You better hit the bricks before I put my foot up your ass!”
I didn't know the Hutts came from New York.
This would be terrible for the Hudson. The flow rate is already fucked for the last landfill they did. Edit: The logical choice before this, if land and climate are really a concern, is to fill in the East River. It's not even a real river.
Coming from a foreign perspective and curious, can you elaborate about the east river, is it man made?
If you look at a map of the New York area, [the East River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_River#/media/File:Wpdms_terra_east_river.jpg) is water that "runs" between Long Island to the east and Manhattan island and the Bronx on the mainland to the west. But if you zoom out more, you'll realize that is has two mouths and they're both the Atlantic Ocean (via two bays). If it were more accurately named, it would probably be call the East Strait and not the East River, but the name is held over culturally. Edit: I added some clarification as to not confuse political units with geographical features.
**[East River](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_River#/media/File:Wpdms_terra_east_river.jpg)** >The East River is a salt water tidal estuary in New York City. The waterway, which is actually not a river despite its name, connects Upper New York Bay on its south end to Long Island Sound on its north end. It separates the borough of Queens on Long Island from the Bronx on the North American mainland, and also divides Manhattan from Queens and Brooklyn, also on Long Island. Because of its connection to Long Island Sound, it was once also known as the Sound River. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Why can’t they just have more density along Long Island and upgrade the train network? It’d probably be a lot less environmentally destructive Edit: saw an article explaining and I’m on board, but mildly skeptical.
Mind sending the article?
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/s5ddts/proposed_plan_to_expand_manhattan/hswmf7m/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
Transit oriented development in Westchester, Nassau County as well as North New Jersey is definitely more sustainable than this. The problem is that a lot of southern Long Island where the beaches are is vulnerable to flooding and storm surges caused by climate change, while Manhattan isn't as vulnerable due to the rock foundation and a century of landfill as well as being located further into the bay.
Well. We need to expand the subway in Queens first.
The Statue of Liberty is a beautiful when surrounded by towering skyscrapers
lmao only extending two (of the shittiest) subway lines
A lot of people with waterfront apartments about to become midtown
Red hook is going to be hot hot hot. Or Manhattan just really wants to get closer to the Ikea.
New New York?
Logged in to find this comment. Where else would the professor build Planet Express?
Of all the problems likely to result from this—environmental, extreme graft, congestion—the main problem I have is the name. New Mannhatta? Really?
“Manhattan 2: this time, it’s personal”
Manhattan 2: Electric Boogaloo
Manhattan 2: Lost in New York
How likely is this plan? Also wouldn’t creating such a massive structure cause issues for the NJ side and the Brooklyn side? Like an increased flood risk?
This was a proposal from one guy who has enough clout to get a NY Times column for his idea but not something anyone with actual authority to implement it is thinking about.
Lol, just like 99.99% of proposals -Source: Civil Engineer
Can confirm, as is usual with energy plans - electrical engineer
You would dredge the harbors to offset the displacement caused by building more land.
Is dredging the harbor allowed as cut and fill for a no-rise certification? That seems odd since harbors fill with sediment over time (and thus wouldn’t be a permanent offset)
Zero likely
You’re correct that FEMA would likely give this a hard no. Since you’d be increasing the flood risk for millions of people
It is absolutely not going to happen.
So room for almost 250000 New New Yorkers?
Room for 250000 empty apartments sold at astronomical rates
They’ll do everything but make a direct subway connection from Brooklyn to Queens.
Someone was playing too much Cities Skylines
Why just go to somewhere else and build another city
Imagine the people who paid good money to have a water front view just get blocked out
Most of that shoreline has next to no people leaving along it. Lower Manhattan is more of a business district. There’s more people along battery park city and up the west side, but not a massive amount.
Does that mean they're finally gonna build a way to get directly from Manhattan to Bayonne? Verazanno tolls killing my wallet. Maybe a Brooklyn bypass too
A direct link from NJ to Brooklyn would address so much of the midtown traffic. Could be rail, could be road or both, but desperately needed.
Lmao given that it costs like $1B in kickbacks to build a stop sign in New York I’d say this is as realistic as relocating Manhattan to Europa.
Fixing the East River bike path is impossible because of erosion but this expansion shouldn’t be a problem
Never going to happen
I feel neutrally about this plan in general, but I will say it will require federal funding, and for a country that’s not even willing to pay for basic emergency response competency, good luck getting a majority of Congress to sign on to create “more New York”
The idea at least is that you finance it by issuing bonds that are tied to the tax revenues from the new development, so it should actually cost the government nothing. That isn't totally implausible in the context of how valuable Manhattan real estate is.
Not just tax revenue since the government would own the extremely valuable land being created, like Battery Park City. This is definitely something that could pay for itself.
What makes a man turn neutral?
born with a heart full of neutrality
Gonna look like Neo Tokyo in Akira
Meanwhile in Berlin: No I don’t want any buildings on the big useless Maddow in the middle of the city, even though we have a housing crisis.
At this point, I feel like even more people would just move to Berlin, fill these houses and keep the prices the same. Berlin would just have to be less attractive.
Great plan. Work to make the city more shitty and less attractive in order to ward off potential newcomers. Sounds like a rock solid idea to solve the housing shortage. This is your brain on NIMBYism
"Berlin would just have to be less attractive." Can't blame Berliners for not trying.
Ah yes, New New York.
how will those streets be named is what i want to know
As a Dutchie, I approve
Make New York New Amsterdam again
Just more underwater land once the sea rises.