Is there a limit to NYC growth? (Newark, Mexico: apartments, crime)

[NY Jew]

Manhattan's had 745,669 more people in 1910 than it did in 2010 according to the census.
Brooklyn had 233,475 more people in 1950 than it did in 2010 according to the census.
the Bronx's had 86, 593 more people in 1970 than it did in 2010 according to the census.

put all 3 together and NY would have 1,065,737 more people.



PS if every single neighborhood in Brooklyn was at it's peak population Brooklyn would likely have 3,000,000 people

[NY Jew]

Originally Posted by geoking66

Since Manhattan is maxing out (apart from Upper Manhattan, but there issues surrounding how much those areas can be developed both physically and from the demand side), the Outer Boroughs have to be ready to absorb demand. Nodes such as Downtown Brooklyn, Long Island City, and Jackson Heights, for example, will be prime locations for upward growth. It won't be at a Manhattan scale, but certainly denser than the surrounding area by at least twofold. In doing so, the city can become less Manhattan-centric, or at least abate demand at the local level for Manhattan, relieving congestion into the island while stimulating growth outwards, with the result of less strain on cross-East River travel.

the Lower East Side has less than half the population it had at the turn of the century.

[nybbler]

Originally Posted by jad2k

I'm not a bike fanatic BUT I really do think making NYC more "bikeable" and bike friendly would go a long way in terms of intercity mobility and ease the noise, congestion, and pollution caused by all the traffic. If anyone has ever been to Amsterdam that city is remarkable in terms of how bikeable it is! I've been trying to dig up some history on how it got to be that way.

Amsterdam is a city of 700,000 people. Of course it has less noise, congestion, and pollution than New York City; it's a lot smaller.

[ericomposer702]

Originally Posted by geoking66

especially since the SAS after phase 2 probably won't be finished.

Is that the word on the street? Not that I'm an expert on it, but it seems like phases 1 & 2 are the most desperately needed, so I can see how the will thereafter could fizzle out.

[nei]

Originally Posted by NY Jew

Manhattan's had 745,669 more people in 1910 than it did in 2010 according to the census.
Brooklyn had 233,475 more people in 1950 than it did in 2010 according to the census.
the Bronx's had 86, 593 more people in 1970 than it did in 2010 according to the census.

put all 3 together and NY would have 1,065,737 more people.



PS if every single neighborhood in Brooklyn was at it's peak population Brooklyn would likely have 3,000,000 people

Other than Bronx, which lost some of its densest housing stock to arson, much of the population loss is due to smaller household sizes. Unless you believe Lower East Side-squalor of 100 years ago is a desireable future, NYC will have to build a lot to gain 1 million people.

[NY Jew]

Originally Posted by nei

Other than Bronx, which lost some of its densest housing stock to arson, much of the population loss is due to smaller household sizes. Unless you believe Lower East Side-squalor of 100 years ago is a desireable future, NYC will have to build a lot to gain 1 million people.

Urban renewal was a major factor (I would be shocked if there weren't less housing units in Lower Manhattan now then there were 100 years ago)

[r small]

8,175,133 seems like a good number.

[nei]

Originally Posted by NY Jew

Urban renewal was a major factor (I would be shocked if there weren't less housing units in Lower Manhattan now then there were 100 years ago)

Look at the population density of the Lower East Side in 1910:

New York (Manhattan) Wards: Population & Density 1800-1910

Some parts reached 400,000 people per square mile. Today the same area are a little above 100,000 people per square mile. Nothing comes close to those densities in NYC today, nor does it exist anywhere in the developed world. Changes explained in this diagram (not sure if it's copyright so I'm not hotlinking it):

http://i.imgur.com/g5Ng0.png

[geoking66]

Originally Posted by NY Jew

Urban renewal was a major factor (I would be shocked if there weren't less housing units in Lower Manhattan now then there were 100 years ago)

No, it was actually speculative construction that occurred in tandem with the building of the subway into Upper Manhattan, the Bronx, and Brooklyn.

[NY Jew]

Originally Posted by geoking66

No, it was actually speculative construction that occurred in tandem with the building of the subway into Upper Manhattan, the Bronx, and Brooklyn.

I was referring to the 2nd era of population loss
population change since Manhattan's peak
1910-20: -47,439
1920-30: -416,791
1930-40: +22,612
1940-50: +70,177
1950-60: -261,820
1960-70: -159,048
1970-80: -110,948
1980-90: +59,251
1990-00: +49,659
2000-10: +48,678

the earlier loss also was drastically effected by the building of the Williamsburg Bridge and the growth of Northern Brooklyn.
North Brooklyn in 1910 was was more dense then some of the most dense parts of NY today.
6 Brooklyn Wards had more then 100 people/acre