11 ms·

Correct. Also it seems that the whole island is covered by a marsh. The island's location is technically a river but it is very close to the ocean and ocean lev

by hristov 13y ago

Correct. Also it seems that the whole island is covered by a marsh. The island's location is technically a river but it is very close to the ocean and ocean levels have risen quite a bit in the past 50 years. So one can expect that the whole thing will be mud and it will be expensive to build anything useful on it. But it would be interesting if some billionaire buys it to build a mansion on there. That would be the ultimate mark of exclusivity.

jacques_chester 13y ago
When I first read about these uninhabited islands, I had the same thought. The ultimate status symbol: private island in sight of Manhattan. And I imagine commuting isn't a problem if you can afford to get around by helicopter.
- rdouble 13y ago
  Commuting still would be a problem because you have to land the helicopter somewhere. There are only 3 heliports in Manhattan.
  - jacques_chester 13y ago
    A lot of skyscrapers have private helipads, is my point. For a sufficiently-expensive executive officer, it actually makes sense to pay for a 15-minute skyscraper-to-skyscraper flight vs losing 45 minutes in a taxi.
    - rdouble 13y ago
      Skyscrapers don't have private heliports in New York. That was my point. Even the "Goldman Sachs" heliport is in New Jersey.
      - jacques_chester 13y ago
        Oh, then I was wrong. I hate that. :|
        rdouble 13y ago
        If you're looking for a city with rooftop helipads, that would be Los Angeles. Although they aren't really for executives. http://clui.org/newsletter/spring-2010/elevated-descent-landingscape-helipads http://clui.org/newsletter/spring-2010/elevated-descent-land...
        JackFr 13y ago
        They used to, until a pedestrian was killed during an accident and it occurred to them that it might not be the best idea. http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/may-16-1977-helicopter-accident-on-top-of-pan-am-building-kills-five/ http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/may-16-1977-hel...
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]

by hristov 13y ago

jacques_chester 13y ago

When I first read about these uninhabited islands, I had the same thought. The ultimate status symbol: private island in sight of Manhattan. And I imagine commuting isn't a problem if you can afford to get around by helicopter.

rdouble 13y ago
Commuting still would be a problem because you have to land the helicopter somewhere. There are only 3 heliports in Manhattan.
- jacques_chester 13y ago
  A lot of skyscrapers have private helipads, is my point. For a sufficiently-expensive executive officer, it actually makes sense to pay for a 15-minute skyscraper-to-skyscraper flight vs losing 45 minutes in a taxi.
  - rdouble 13y ago
    Skyscrapers don't have private heliports in New York. That was my point. Even the "Goldman Sachs" heliport is in New Jersey.
    - jacques_chester 13y ago
      Oh, then I was wrong. I hate that. :|
      - rdouble 13y ago
        If you're looking for a city with rooftop helipads, that would be Los Angeles. Although they aren't really for executives. http://clui.org/newsletter/spring-2010/elevated-descent-landingscape-helipads http://clui.org/newsletter/spring-2010/elevated-descent-land...
      - JackFr 13y ago
        They used to, until a pedestrian was killed during an accident and it occurred to them that it might not be the best idea. http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/may-16-1977-helicopter-accident-on-top-of-pan-am-building-kills-five/ http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/may-16-1977-hel...
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]