Bill de Blasio has argued that “Technology is critical to New York’s place as a 21st Century city,” not just because it brings new jobs and investments, but because it disrupts an old cycle and way of being (“Building a Smart + Equitable City,” nyc.gov, 3). He wants to build a smart and equitable city, but is only building on existing problems, not choosing to disrupt any current and antiquated parts of the city; while it may not be cost-efficient, putting a band-aid on something that needs major surgery. But the problem, according to the municipal government, is that there’s no room in the budget for surgery. So what’s the best option? Utilizing new technology to fix what can be saved, and waiting until something breaks down before fixing it.
The plan is to use technology to create a greener city with lighter carbon footprints, all while promising to save money in the process. This is so that every New Yorker can experience the same equity, or access, to the same opportunities. (We all know this to be false, but it’s a biased and glass half-full kind of article). This is said to be done by fixing infrastructure, implementing wireless water meters, fixing public transit and traffic signals, a more efficient waste management, monthly air and water quality inspections, gunshot detection, snow plow tracking, and a partridge in a pair tree ((“Building a Smart + Equitable City, 3-23). These all seem to be beneficial and strategical plans, but why does it feel like life in New York is getting worse? To be fair, a lot of these plans are still in their infancy and need time to update them in order to become more productive, but these plans also do more monitoring than actually fixing. For example, the “improved” snow plow tracking, called PlowNYC, is literally just a snow plow tracker. Yes, it’s great to know in real time (a phrase they love to use) where plow trucks are for traffic’s sake and pedestrians’ sake, but this should’ve already been implemented years ago for a city that’s so keen on calling itself “World Class.” How about design more efficient plows and find substances other than rock salt to melt ice (which ruins roads, contributing to pot holes and future road repair, which will add to an increasing deficit.)
Transit is also becoming an enigma, because no matter how much money goes into the 113-year old system, it seems to do nothing to help. That’s because we’re neglecting the most important part and culprit of train delays and malfunctions: infrastructure and the addition of cars. Since the 90’s, daily subway ridership has increased to 50%, but barely any waves in infrastructure and ride capacity have changed (What New York City’s subway system can learn from ones around the world, Sisson.) A lot of the money that is in the budget was used to build shiny, new stations, like the one on 72nd street, which cost 1.2 billion a km. Madrid’s new station cost 58 million, and was completed faster even though it stretched a longer path. That’s because they used a cut and cover method, unlike New York’s tunnel boring. NYC actually prohibits cut and cover because they believe it disrupts small businesses, but Madrid gives business owners adequate time in advance and completes the station faster and cheaper. One of the most successful and beautiful stations is in Stockholm, Sweden, and that is attributed to it’s closing at night. NY is famous for a 24-hour subway system, but that leaves almost no time for maintenance and repair. And while it does technically run 24 hours, only about three trains come an hour at unpopular times, making it inefficient for riders.
So while minor improvements are being made and greenhouse gases are being cut, so are the budget and think-tanks that can be used to create an even more successful NYC. I believe that looking at other cities globally makes for a more enlightened citizen and city, and that borrowing ideas and doing research is the cheapest and most effective method of all.
Sisson, “What New York City’s subway system can learn from ones around the world” ny.curbed.com
