Living on the Edge

Why are we developing New York City's Waterfront if it will only get washed away?

Thursday, November 01, 2012

Look at a New York City evacuation map and you’ll notice something about many of the red areas along the water’s edge: they correspond to areas that the Bloomberg administration hopes will catch on as new residential neighborhoods.

The red areas denote Zone A, which means residents are supposed to evacuate if there’s a threat of a tropical storm approaching the city. It include's Manhattan’s West Side, Greenpoint-Williamsburg, Hunter’s Point and Coney Island.

Why is the city trying to encourage development in areas that, especially after Sandy, seem so vulnerable?

“It’s a very profound question because one of the things that has given the city a lot of rebirth and energy has been the redevelopment of the waterfront,” said William Solecki, a geography professor at Hunter College and co-chairman of the New York City Panel on Climate Change. “It’s that delicate balance between development and access to the water and limiting exposure.”

Solecki says one solution is to design buildings to withstand occasional flooding: sub-basements that are entirely sealed to the outside, high windows on the first floor, or architectural strategy adapted from Florida that treats the first floor as a fairly expendable “blow-out zone” that could be washed out without causing serious damage.

Solecki says he’s not entirely convinced design is the answer, but says Sandy provides a test-case.

About 375,000 people live in Zone A and they were supposed to evacuate on Sunday, in advance of the storm. Many did not. Most live in areas that have long been settled like the Rockaways.

But over the past decade, the Bloomberg administration has moved quickly to rezone industrial areas. Once built up, another 5,400 apartments in Williamsburg-Greenpoint, 4,500 in Coney Island, and roughly 5,000 on Manhattan’s West Side will have been added to Zone A over the next few decades, perhaps accounting for another 30,000 or 40,000 people.

The city’s taken various approaches to making those new developments heartier, such as requiring new construction to meet rigorous flood-proof standards, or raising new developments above storm surge levels by adding landfill.

A former Bloomberg administration official, Vishaan Chakrabarti, was involved in some of those rezoning efforts when he was Manhattan Director at the Department of City Planning. Now at of the Center for Urban Real Estate at Columbia University, he’s increasingly skeptical that design measures by themselves will solve the problem and that eventually the city may want to explore building a sea wall, like in the Netherlands, that would rise to keep storm surges from inundating New York City.

“What are we going to do? Retreat from the water’s edge?” he asked. “We have Battery Park City, which has a larger population than many towns in other parts of the country. We have the New York Stock Exchange. We have Wall Street. We have all sorts of housing in Zone A, and there’s no way this could get pulled back to Zone B, and Zone B will eventually be in danger.”

One long time opponent of developing the waterfront, Marcy Benstock, sees such logic as folly. The executive director of the Clean Air Campaign and its Open Rivers Project. Benstock looks at the city’s flood map, sees a lot of white — all those areas that lie outside of the red, orange and yellow zones that show which residents should evacuate, depending on the increasing severity of the storm. (The red edge is just for tropical storms and category 1 hurricanes, the orange for category 2, the yellow is for categories 3 and 4) And it’s there, she says, in those white spaces, where New York should be developing.

Along the water, she suggests, putting affordable parks that may flood, but would be easily and cheaply repaired.

“Let the waterways act as waterways,” she said. “If you want to work against nature you can create multi-billion dollar problems for yourselves.”


More in:

Comments [3]

Marcy Benstock from New York, NY

It would be great if you could remove my previous comment (now moot), or at least remove our e-mail address. Thank you for removing the incorrect links before!
Marcy Benstock, Sat. Nov. 3, 2012

Nov. 03 2012 12:41 PM
Sandra from Brooklyn

I rather like the idea of modeling a solution after the Netherlands. This was New Amsterdam, after all. We could build a sea wall and power the pumps with windmills. The tunnel entrances would be within the walled areas. This approach has the advantage that it would protect equally the poor in their areas and the rich in their new construction. It would protect the subterranean infrastructure as it exists. The sea wall could be topped with a recreational linear park like the one we currently have on the West Side.

It will be expensive, yes, as it was for the Netherlands. But what choices do we have? We can suffer future calamities, or we can retreat as Marcy Benstock suggests, to the small an temporarily safe areas on the map. If in 100 years, sea level has risen a meter or two, as some suggest it might, we had better start building those sea walls!

Nov. 01 2012 08:53 PM
Marcy Benstock from New York NY

Correction: News has had two incorrect links for Clean Air Campaign Inc. and its Open Rivers Project in Matthew Scherman's "Living on the Edge" story today. The Clean Air Campaign Inc. whose Executive Director I am can be reached at 212-582-2578, or by mail to Clean Air Campaign Inc., 307 Seventh Avenue, NY NY 10001. E-mails to sometimes go astray, but that is the correct e-mail address.
(The incorrect links on today were to Clean Air NY and a Clean Air Campaign based in Georgia; the organization I work for is based in NYC.)
Thank you if you can correct this.
Marcy Benstock

Nov. 01 2012 03:52 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.


Latest Newscast




WNYC is supported by the Charles H. Revson Foundation: Because a great city needs an informed and engaged public


Supported by