Why More Places Restrict Anchoring

[hellosailor]

Sean-
"I try to compare NYC to Miami. There is little to no dockage in NYC,...(there is also no anchoring right around Manhattan)."
A little historical perspective. The underwater bottom around Manhattan is privately owned out to "the bulkhead line" which you will find on some maps and charts. Everything outside of that line, is part of the navigable waterways. This is a bit unique, in that all the bays and inlets have been filled in, i.e. you can't anchor in Turtle Bay anymore, it just isn't there. As you move down to Wall Street and the Battery...over 1/3 of lower Manhattan is built on landfill. Come about three of four blocks inland and you are on the old waterfront, that's where the anchorages went. Landfill.

On the other hand, there most definitely IS anchoring "around" Manhattan if you move out just a little bit. The industrial moorings all through the upper and lower bay are regulated by necessity for large craft. But small craft can anchor near Liberty and Ellis Islands, there are anchorages on the maps. There are also anchorages on the Brooklyn and Queens side of the East River. Not readily visible and I'm not sure you'd get your anchor back up...but they are there.

NYC just isn't se up for shantytowns on the water, and with the absence of dinhy docks....it wouldn't make much sense to anchor out near most of it anyway. The South Street Seaport used to offer transient dockage (steep fee, more reasonable for members) but they've found better uses for their docks, they say.

Of course, 25-30 years ago the big marinas on the NJ side of the Hudson just didn't exist either--so one could make a good case for saying there is MORE private dockage in [sic] NYC than there was 30 years ago. And then, there's the Chelsea Piers and other development too.


"Is it a possibility that people want that waterfront for their next condo or hi-rise and are simply out-bidding marinas or making offers marinas can't refuse? "
Well, that's the way City Island went. And that's where most of the "real sailing" around NYC was based. Couple of old places on the north shore of Queens near Whitestone also were condo-ed out. A lot of condos were built in the 80's and 90's and dockominiums also put in. Part of the problem was that it was impossible to get an EPA permit to dispose of the hazardous waste (as the collapsing old piers were classed) so they were unfeasible to keep or rebuild.

"Maybe it's just getting too crowded? " I've heard that's a problem in paradise, too.<G>

NYC? Nah, space of any kind, on land or sea, has been at a premium for way too long. Everybody wants in, and the damned tourists don't have the courtesy to go home after Labor Day. Tourists from India, Mexico, New Jersey, CT, Kansas...doesn't matter where, you're all tourists and it would be nice to remember you're supposed to GO HOME ON LABOR DAY so the natives can enjoy the quiet winters here.<G>

[ssullivan]

Fantastic post, Hellosailor!!

I love good NYC history like that. I learned a lot. I was just thinking that maybe... just maybe... there was some similarity in that any place with a growing population will end up looking like Manhattan eventually when the population hits the same number. I was wondering if Miami might be in some kind of growing pains that have taken place before in days long gone by in NYC. Could be very different, I guess though.

[hellosailor]

Sean-
"in that any place with a growing population will end up looking like Manhattan eventually when the population hits the same number." Nah, rarely two places that are enough alike. And Miami is very different again.

NYC's growth came from the geography, the seaport (well, it once was considered a deepwater port) the wharves, the trains. The bedrock allowed the skyscrapers, even with modern techniques not all cities would support them. And, again, the transit system. Miami has nothing to touch it, and the sea-level flooded coral ground there wouldn't allow them to build it. Each city is different. Miami and Florida's Gold Coast are constrained by the Everglades (hey, nice, but a swamp is a swamp, someone please drain it<G>) and NYC is choked by the rivers that gave it life. Bottlenecks at every crossing, no way to really beat it. Today, cities that are inland in the flats and able to expand out in all directions would seem to have the advantage. Of course, the transit problems are still there, no one wants to raise taxes and really build good transit systems.

Last time I heard of a corporation getting a boondoggle to stay in NYC, I said the hell with that, let them move to Kansas AND require them to take every last brick of their old building with them. Manhattan actually must have been a beautiful island once, before it got all covered up and filled in. Wouldn't bother me any to close the borders and start an "export only" construction program.<G>