Manhattan 2050

[emathias]

Originally Posted by ItsConanOBrien

That Manhattan Airport site is interesting...



I didn't get much time to dig around the site, but maybe it's a clever spoof to make people think about their surroundings and how wonderful Central Park is? Or maybe not. Either way, I was thinking of marketing ideas for a local park in my city and thought it would neat to put up a site and take out ads calling the city to replace the entire park, the city's largest, with car parking. I imagined that it would bring people to get more involved in the upkeep of the park and recognize it for the gem that it is.

Be careful, you just might end up with a lot more parking ...

[M II A II R II K]

There may have to be flood barriers if they have increased flooding and hurricanes.

[wjfox2004]

Has anyone considered the possibility that cities may start to plateau in terms of skyscraper development?

In the future, technology and telecommuting could fundamentally alter the nature of real estate.

There will be an eventual merger of the human brain and the Internet, combined with the use of highly convincing VR environments (extremely likely by 2050). This could lead to a massive decentralization of office work. Factor in the use of AI - replacing many functions currently performed by brokers, loan writers, traders, etc. - and you have plummeting demand for office space.

[M II A II R II K]

But one must also factor building the tallest building for the sake of doing so, whether it's needed or not.

Another possible reason for a decline in skyscrapers would be to have hovering buildings that stay up there permanently so it wouldn't matter if the ground below it was taken, maybe a little like the Jetsons.

[M II A II R II K]

[PhillyVegan]

Originally Posted by Krases

I think the space between the new WTC and the Empire state building will be non-stop skyscrapers. Central park will also get a lot of shade from the residential towers that will likely surround it.

I'm not a geology expert, but I think the reason that there aren't a lot of large towers in that area between lower and midtown Manhattan is because the hard bedrock dips below the surface quite a bit in that area, and the ground would not support such large structures easily.

[bnk]

Originally Posted by PhillyVegan

I'm not a geology expert, but I think the reason that there aren't a lot of large towers in that area between lower and midtown Manhattan is because the hard bedrock dips below the surface quite a bit in that area, and the ground would not support such large structures easily.

.

I have heard and seen the same explanation on the History Channel I think.

But anything is possible. Chicago is built on a swamp and I think the bedrock is even deeper than the area you are talking about. Deep caissons socketed into bedrock can do wonders for tall buildings where the bedrock is far below the surface. It is more expensive I imagine though.

[Yankee]

I think highrise development will spread to the other boroughs. There are a lot of underdeveloped post-industrial sections which will be converted to residential / commercial / parks areas, including highrises there as well. As dense as Manhattan is if you just Google map it and start looking for neglected empty-ish areas there are still lots that will be developed in the upcoming decades, and even more in the other boroughs. A good example is the area across from the UN where the Olympic Village was planned for the 2012 Olympics if NYC had gotten it.

I sincerely hope that all the gross ugly public housing units in both Manhattan and the other boroughs are gradually torn down and office/condos/parks/retail or other aesthetically pleasing and pedestrian friendly projects begin forming there (hopefully something similar will happen to public housing units in Chicago, San Francisco, LA, and everywhere else)

Hopefully by 2050 race and class will have nothing or little in common and residential segregation will gradually disappear which will spur developments in former slums and real estate values will equalize more, although there will obvioulsy always be slums.

What else... Pedestrian-friendly development has been the trend for a while now and that will only intensify in large cities across America, with NYC most likely leading the trend. What happened to Times Square will probably spread to other parts of the city. Picturesque pedmalls and pedestrian bridges, all kinds of developments like that will happen hopefully, I mean who knows if we'll even be driving cars in 2050, maybe personal vehicles will lock on to the road and automatically go, maybe we'll fly everywhere who knows, but either way mass transit in NYC and other big cities in the country will only improve from now on.

I'm sure rail will be much bigger then, after California builds its Hi-Speed Rail system, the rest of the country will follow and the Northeast corridor will likely be first - possibly even maglev trains will run up and down from Boston to DC and NYC will be a major hub obviously.

Things like that... I think we're headed the right way.

[Hed Kandi]

We all know what NYC will look like by 2050, but to remind you of the exciting times ahead:

[Mr. Lion]

Finaly a topic about something other than Dubai . Well lets see Manhattan 2050... there are many options of what would happen. My comment will be rather long so buckle up for the ride. I live in new york and there are many things that i would like to happen but probably won't but you never now. Now about this Manhattan Airport thing, its a hoax as I am sure some of the more intelligent of you have figured out. http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/permalink/the_manhattan_airport_foundation/

Now onto the topic. Im sure we will see many more buildings in the 400 meter+ range. Im sure that public opposition will keep some of them down but not for long. With the contruction of the new World Trade Center (Twin Towers 2 or Freedom tower) we will see the restoration of the Lower Manhattan Skyline. Downtown is become quite a bit more important these days and I have a feeling that the skyscrapers will start spreading quickly North (probably the 50 floor+ skyscrapers stopping around Canal Street.

The advertising and electronic influence of Times Square will most likely spread as mentioned in a higher post. The tall buildings of midtown will begin to creap South (probably limmited to North of 35t Street). Mass transit coverage wil lbe higher than it is today, with the addition of the Second Avenue Subway, not to mention the East Side Access project and THE Tunnel. With competition from Dubai and other cities, I think thta mass development programs such as those in Dubai (Buisness Bay, Dubai Waterfront) will begin to appear around the city in restored and decontaminated industrial areas (like the entire Newtown Creek). If we can't get control of our greenhouse emissions then we might need to start building dams to hold back the water. We are in for one wild ride.
-:babyeat:-Lion-:babyeat:-

[Krases]

Originally Posted by bnk

.

I have heard and seen the same explanation on the History Channel I think.

But anything is possible. Chicago is built on a swamp and I think the bedrock is even deeper than the area you are talking about. Deep caissons socketed into bedrock can do wonders for tall buildings where the bedrock is far below the surface. It is more expensive I imagine though.

I think I saw the exact same show you did. The bedrock does dip down pretty far but it's not something increased land value and technology can't fix.

Originally Posted by Hed Kandi

When I am 60 years old (2050) I am moving to New York for the....sights.

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by Hed Kandi

We all know what NYC will look like by 2050, but to remind you of the exciting times ahead:

If/when Greenland's and Antarctica's large reservoirs of fresh water locked in ice melts, then scientists predict a rise in sea level by 40 feet as a conservative estimate. I think that pretty much submerges the entire island doesn't it?

[M II A II R II K]

Unless barriers are put in place before that happens.

[Krases]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty

If/when Greenland's and Antarctica's large reservoirs of fresh water locked in ice melts, then scientists predict a rise in sea level by 40 feet as a conservative estimate. I think that pretty much submerges the entire island doesn't it?

Isn't that the empire state building in the background of the second picture? That's like 800ft!

[Matty]

I hope Manhattan in 2050 will still be the main core of New York, though somewhat eclipsed by development and growth in the outer boroughs.

I find this city far too centralized. There's plenty of room in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx for offices, residences, what have you. Plus the infrastructure to boot.

[babybackribs2314]

Originally Posted by Matty

I hope Manhattan in 2050 will still be the main core of New York, though somewhat eclipsed by development and growth in the outer boroughs.

I find this city far too centralized. There's plenty of room in Brooklyn, Queens and the Bronx for offices, residences, what have you. Plus the infrastructure to boot.

It has and always will be Manhattan-centric... that is why it is New York City, and not Brooklyn or Queens or the Bronx...

The other boroughs might grow population/density wise but they will never become more powerful/influential relative to what they are now, as Manhattan is and always will be significantly denser/the center of everything.

[urbanactivist]

I disagree with the comment that skyscrapers won't be needed. With the abilities we have today, we are proving that skyscraper cities can be much more energy efficient that average highrise or lowrise tenements. I'd imagine that Manhattan will be building LEED Titanium-certified residential units, while simultaneously restoring some of the historic buildings. Probably taking the old building as the core and encasing it in the newer building... that way none of the material goes to waste. That's how I imagine Manhattan when I'm 78 (ugh!!).

[LosAngelesBeauty]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Unless barriers are put in place before that happens.

Humans are like frogs. You boil them slowly enough, and they'll never react until it's too late.


pinnacleoptima.com

[CGII]

Originally Posted by PhillyVegan

I'm not a geology expert, but I think the reason that there aren't a lot of large towers in that area between lower and midtown Manhattan is because the hard bedrock dips below the surface quite a bit in that area, and the ground would not support such large structures easily.

Skyscrapers exist in every neighbourhood of Manhattan; they are not restricted by this alleged geologic impediment. Lower Manhattan is built much taller because it is the origin of the city [the most established commercial district in the city] and Midtown is built much taller because both majour train stations exist there, making commercial space there more valuable. The lack of skyscrapers between Midtown and Downtown has very little to do with bedrock depth.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesBeauty

Humans are like frogs. You boil them slowly enough, and they'll never react until it's too late.

Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong, these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.

—Churchill