Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

UnusualAd6529 t1_jd179dj wrote

It's not really feasible as the canals existed a LONG time ago, namely during the time of Dutch settlement in New Amsterdam.

The ditch are expert canal builders and brought a lot of what they learned from developing their cities to the island of Manhattan.

However, while the Dutch were great canal builders, the English were great land builders. As in London, English settlers and their subsequent anglo-Nee Yorker descendants filled in acres and acres of the river and wetlands systems such that the edge the water where canals used to start are far from the rivers.

That being said Canals don't really make sense for New York. 200 years of development and infilling mean every square inch if Manhattan is densely developed high density urban landscape. It wouldn't be feasible nor beneficial to rip a canal into the city. No canal transportation could possibly compete with the high efficiency of rail in that kind of setting.

19

Metapod_Used_Hardon t1_jd183u3 wrote

> The ditch are expert canal builders

They’d have to be, with a name like “the ditch.”

12

Life_Equivalent_2104 OP t1_jd17lrk wrote

This so far is the best answer I've gotten and thoroughly explains

7

Sad-Principle3781 t1_jd2gjn1 wrote

i mean duh. canals won't make any sense compared to trains for transportation. they're more fun now but not practical

3

hawt_pawket t1_jd14vw9 wrote

Why would we want canals? Have you been to the Gowanus Canal or Newtown Creek? They’re disgusting.

11

Life_Equivalent_2104 OP t1_jd15ice wrote

Clean them up I mean it's not like other cities around the world don't have clean canals. Amsterdam for instance.

3

hawt_pawket t1_jd15rt2 wrote

But why would we want more canals?

3

Life_Equivalent_2104 OP t1_jd1738l wrote

idk I think it be nice to see what the city looked like before they were paved in. It's not like any harm would be done. The canals were there for 1000 if not millions of years.

−12

hawt_pawket t1_jd17u3k wrote

There were not canals in NYC for thousands or millions of years. Are you thinking of uncovering streams and rivers that have been paved over?

15

shamam t1_jd2cc9q wrote

The canals in Amsterdam are filthy.

1

ChrisRuss86 t1_jd1b09g wrote

The Dutch built some canals and dikes for transportation and drainage purpose. When the British took control of the colony in 1664, they renamed it New York, and the city continued to evolve over time. Many of the original Dutch canals were eventually filled in or paved over as Manhattan's streets and infrastructure expanded. The one notable waterway, Canal Street, was constructed much later in the early 19th century by Americans, not the Dutch. The canal was built to divert water from the pond to the Hudson River, and the street that was eventually built over the canal was named Canal Street.

1

vasjpan02 t1_jd2b1m2 wrote

well, the 1963 world fair prep buried a lot of streams and than now causes a lit of flooding and stinks up flushing bay by reducing flow. they once considered extending flushing river to jamaica. upstate,they abandined linking susquehanna to great lakes

1

Federal_Fondant_1985 t1_jd2pmyw wrote

Why do you want them?? I feel like they’d just end up collecting trash… and have no real purpose in 2023

1

Die-Nacht t1_jd1ci47 wrote

In theory, yeah, you can. In practice, you would need to convince people to remove an area that is currently dedicated to car traffic, in order to turn it into a canal.

Though a canal is way better than car traffic, currently, turning one of those car-traffic-shocked streets into anything but that (eg. bike lanes, pedestrian plazas, etc), is a massive political undertaking. Imagine doing that PLUS coming up with the funds to rebuild and maintain a canal.

0