Tag Archives: Museum of City of New York

Museum of the City of New York || Response

Leave a reply

The relatively short walk from the 103rd Street subway station was a bit frightening for me, but I thoroughly enjoyed our trip to the Museum of the City of New York. Our tour guide was welcoming and very informative. I learned a lot from the Making Room exhibit, especially from the statistics. The numbers were surprising – more than a third of New York City’s population consists of single households. I am sure the number would be greater because many people don’t report to the Census Bureau. Statistics on the population growth was particularly shocking for me. The Bloomberg administration predicted that the population of our city would reach nine million by 2030! I cannot imagine how New York city would be like with that amount of people. There will definitely be many, many dense housing complexes. “Making room” would be vital.

An interesting part of the exhibit was the comparison of housing across our five boroughs. As I expected, all the boroughs, with the exception of Manhattan, would have more plots of land and houses. There are more nuclear families in these boroughs. Manhattan on the other hand, has a lot of single households and there are many apartments. It is cramped and densely populated. However, I have personally observed that Queens (particularly Long Island City and Flushing) transforming to that as well. There are a lot more high-rise apartment buildings built to accomodate the increasing population. The costs of living in these areas are also becoming increasingly more expensive.

With the need to build more efficient residences to accomodate a greater amount of people, the demand for engineers and interior designers is high. They will build the future of New York City. When I saw the models in the exhibit, I was amazed at all the structures, both inside and out. Unconventional curving architecture not allowed gave an aesthetic appeal, it also made space more efficient in apartments. High ceilings can be taken advantage of. I find that these models are so futuristic because they depart completely from what we are used to.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the exhibit was the micro apartment. I actually saw Mayor Bloomberg reveal the concept on the news a couple of days ago. But seeing it in person, I was completely blown out of my mind knowing how a small space can become so efficient. At the same time, it was so aesthetically pleasing. I thought it was better than how IKEA can make a small space efficient. It was better than any picture in the IKEA catalogue! I thought it was amazing how the chair can be transformed into a ladder, how the couch can become a queen-sized bed in an instant, and how a wall cabinet can become a work station. Going through this micro apartment made me think about how I can make my own room just as amazing.

I am certainly looking forward to the future of housing, especially with these micro apartments. When the experiment in Kips Bay is completed next year, I will definitely look into it and consider renting. I find that is much better than a dormitory… and it is super close to Baruch. I also hope that concept will become accepted by the public, especially for singles. With the predicted population of nine million by 2030, these new housing structures will definitely play an important part in the future of New York City.

Museum of City of New York

Leave a reply

At the visit to the museum, I found the statistics that we went through very interesting, yet some of them not too shocking. First, it came to me no surprise about the distribution of types of living groups in specific locations of the city. The nuclear families, which consisted of 18% of the population, mostly stayed in parts of Queens and Brooklyn. This is not surprising because that is the location of suburbs. It is usually stated that families live in suburbs because there are more houses there, which gives more living room for growing families, especially for kids. Another non-shocker is that singles consist of 33% of the population, and most of them stay in Manhattan. Since families make up suburbs, singles make up the city. Also, they have more money to spend on themselves (rather than on a family), so they can afford to live in the city. Furthermore, being in the Manhattan makes commuting to work easier. In addition, the living space in the city is smaller, which fits single people better. And finally, the night life that the city offers attracts many young single people to want to live here.

What was interesting was how in 1800, the population in New York City was 60,515 people and in 2011, the population was 8,244,900. The curve that was displayed was exponentially growing, with it leveling at the top. I think the reason there was rapid growth could be sanitary/health improvements, immigration, and the baby boom generation. I wonder if there are other factors involved to explain the rapid growth.

One of the interesting and surprising facts I learned today was that the government regulated that no more than three unrelated adults are allowed to live together. I want to know when and why was this regulation implemented, and how come the maximum number is three rather than four. What if the living space is big enough for four people? Relating to that, it was shocking to me when the curator said rent postings on Craigslist are sometimes illegal because they do not follow housing regulations. If this is the case, then are housing authorities doing anything to stop it?

The last shocking information that I discovered today was New York only came in number 17 as the top single-person household city in America. Seattle, Denver, San Francisco, and Boston are large cities, but they are not larger than New York. That is why I am shocked New York ranked that low. When I think of singles, I think New York is a great place because of the vast amount of opportunities here. However, there is the counterargument that New York has one of the highest standard of living, so it may be expensive for many people.

With the statistics of types of people living in New York, it shows that more single people are here rather than nuclear families. It does make sense that the new buildings that are built in the city are in the idea of non-nuclear families. I see so many apartments in not only the city, but also in places like Long Island City, Roosevelt Island, etc. But the problem is still the cost. I am constantly trying to find apartments to rent in the city, but the prices is always the obstacle for me. When I drive on the Queensboro Bridge, I always see apartment complexes but many of the rooms are empty. This shows that places to live are available, but I think the costs is what prevents people from living there.

The most eventful part of the museum visit for me was Bloomberg’s adAPT NYC to build micro-units. I found the model apartment quite fascinating, and it really makes me want to live there. It really does conserve space because everything seems to be foldable/convertible. Compared to my dorm room, this micro unit is larger, and it would be great that I would not have to share the bathroom, kitchen, and living space with someone else. I am excited for when this project is complete, but again, I think the price of it will be the issue at hand. But, there do seem to be some downsides for this micro-unit. First, it looks like people will be living in really close-knit within the building, based on what the video displayed. It is great there they are planning to build a rock-climbing area, a pool on the roof, etc. However, it just looks really cramped and crowded. Second, the fact that many things have to be folded/pulled/pushed out can be daunting. Also, the portable chair and dinner table looks small, low, and uncomfortable. But overall, if the price is not too expensive, I would rather live here than in a dormitory.