One, that helps lower Manhattan, is to marsh-ify the edges and streets of the city to deal with flooding in a robust way. Another way is for the Brooklyn area, to make artificial shellfish nurseries to filter the water and to mitigate onrushing tides. The last proposal is for the neighborhood of Staten Island. The idea is to construct a damlike structure with suspension towers that would p Arthur Kill, a tidal straight that separates Staten Island from the mainland of New Jersey. All three are separate proposals that have different things that are good about them.
After reading this article, the best proposal is for Lower Manhattan. This is the best choice because it’s practical. It’s practical because it uses something that already happens in nature, which proves that it works. It’s also practical because it doesn’t claim to stop flooding by making huge sea walls, or barriers, which is almost impossible (and expensive) to keep out Mother Nature. Their goal is to design a more resilient city, to improve on the city, instead of trying to stop the actual disaster.
Since we can’t very much practically keep out the waters, so you improve the edges and streets of the city to deal with flooding in a more robust way. This past week, many disturbing images of cars floating in the water of a parking lot by Wall Street were released. Also, because Lower Manhattan (where most of Manhattan’s power outs occurred) is vulnerable to floods because it sits low in relation to the sea, it also sticks out on the heaps of artificial landfill into the waters of the New York Harbor.
It is not a coincident that the flooded areas of Manhattan largely correspond to the island’s pre-landfill borders. So there must be a plan to improve the city, and Mr. Cassel and his team might just have found it. They would like to re-engineer the streets in the neighborhood to be more resilient and boisterous to handle more by changing the asphalt on the least affected streets “Level 1 streets” to absorptive materials like porous concrete to sop up excess water to irrigate plantings in the street bed.
The next level up “Level 2 streets” that expect more powerful surges will send the water into the marshes at the islands edges and also into prepositioned ponds meant to collect runoff water for dry spells. Level 3 streets, however will require a shift in the current city grid, it would be parallel to the shoreline and is designed to drain the floodwater back into the harbor. This is better than the other plans also because it is more affordable.
It is less expensive to dig out ponds and marshes, something that this borough had a lot of before it became one of the most industrialized places in the world than to spend millions of dollars finding and raising oysters and protecting them from natural predators or to construct huge towering bridges/ dams. Also, the oyster proposal will not stop natural things like the oysters vibrio bacteria that if contained at high levels, can and will get mass amounts of oysters sick.
This idea will also keep the manmade structures and buildings Manhattan is so widely none for, but adding a big of engineered ecology, If you look into the history of Manhattan, you can see we have took down much of the nature and in its place put man made things. What we can do is slowly bring back the nature to make the city more robust and keep it flourishing the way it had. What I didn’t like about others is just how much change; something many people aren’t adapted to is going to happen. Is making a huge bridge/dam structure going to affect the everyday lives of Staten Islanders?
Yes. Also, the oyster idea is very complex and will require the hiring of many professionals to check on the oysters daily, which will add to the costs. Not only are small ponds and marshes going to be made, small land based grassy parks will also be going along with the construction. It will bring just the right amount of natural scenery into Manhattan without damaging what this borough is known for, also will protect against flooding and will encourage the returning of animals. This proposal is the most fitting.
This article’s writer did a very good job at stating opinions without making a bias toward each proposal, letting the reader decide which is best. This article draws attention to what major leaders are saying about improving the city, like the governor and mayor. It gives a look into the future and just how much work and thinking is going into improving our state, which is something many people don’t often think about. The problems and mayhem and havoc that hurricanes and big storms wreak on coastal areas are becoming more and more mainstream now that Hurricane Sandy hit the city.
It draws major awareness, something each and every New Yorkan needs because of just how shocking the facts science is telling us. A major storm like this will soon be an annual occurrence in 8 decades or so and we still haven’t improved our city much. This is why I think that this proposal will work the best in making out city more able-bodied and strong. The future of New York City will not change unless we as a community can come up with a way to solve problems. More people should be aware of the facts, the ideas and contribute their own two cents into society.
What will be done lies in the hands of the millions of minds that have ideas into saving their own city. Of course, there is not stopping natural occurrences, but that doesn’t mean that these ideas don’t matter. Millions of people live in fear for these natural occurrences so we as a community need to protect the welfare of fellow citizens by supporting whatever idea you find best for the future of New York City. The world is not going to change unless we make a change.