“There is a harm to having these 32-foot- tall futuristic towers, often with large video display terminals on them, in residential neighborhoods in historic districts” — The New York Times
The New York Times picks up on the growing “visual distraction” that the appearance of 5G towers has created, along with a debate about their existence vis-à-vis the historic street-level visual character of neighborhoods such as Greenwich Village. LinkNYC is planning to add up to 2,000 more to its already 150-strong inventory. Alternative designs to the “shroud”-covered 32-foot poles were apparently too “ugly” by New York standards.
Still, an expanding chorus of detractors has led to FCC reviews and complaints from at least 16 community boards. Crain's also reported last week the city's Chief Technology Officer, Matthew Fraser, is considering a massive redesign campaign in deference to them and the torrent of tech companies' proposals that have followed since their roll out in 2022.
5 Comments
The short answer is "No", the 5G tampons are bizarre. But isn't this just another example of our productized privatized urban environment. Why try to solve multiple problems or replace another piece of the urban landscape when we can create another short term solution that ends up the garbage within 3 years.
I think the LinkNYC totems have a more direct (and negative) impact on the streetscape experience. Giant eye level screens on both sides that are on 24 / 7.
If one wants the internet, then one needs to accept the infrastructure it requires. Even if one *does* live in a charming historic obscenely expensive neighborhood.
I agree. Am reminded of folks rallying against motor vehicles while happily ordering everything online.
They beat this:
https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/photos-when-telephone-wires-took-over-manhattan
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.