How does the information about the transportation system in New York City help to reinforce the ideas in the passage? Skyscrapers: Architectural Beauties or Eyesores?
by Alex Brown

Skyscrapers may be considered impressive feats of engineering. Some skyscrapers are famous enough to be landmarks, such as the Empire State building in New York City. However, not everyone is delighted by these towering structures. This became clear in 2013 in New York City. The Department of City Planning proposed allowing more skyscrapers on the East Side of Manhattan. While the area in question was once the most intensely developed square mile in the world, few new structures have been built in decades. Some people felt the buildings were obsolete and should be replaced by newer and bigger ones. The proposal was intended to allow for new buildings that could compete with the most impressive modern buildings in the world.
However, the proposal faced strong opposition from people who did not believe that bigger is always better. Opponents of changing the building guidelines came up with three arguments. First, some people claimed the area had already been developed enough. They felt that more vertical growth was not the answer for the future. Instead, they suggested that perhaps the city should invest in new rail centers and high-speed trains to allow people to live outside of the city and commute into work.
Second, people expressed concerns that the subways and trains would not be able to support additional riders. (New York City is known for its excellent public transportation, but the crowded trains and subways are its Achilles' heel.) Finally, some of the neighborhood's buildings have historical value. These structures could be threatened by new construction.
Not everyone saw these claims as valid. Those who backed the proposal believed that the transportation system could handle new riders. They thought the changes would make the area more attractive to people who lived and worked there. Some people also felt that there were already too many historic landmarks in the city. They believed not all of those buildings were important enough to preserve, and modern buildings could be more efficient. Finally, they claimed that New York must continue to grow in order to maintain its importance in the world. They believed New York could not stay competitive in global commerce if it did not support new development.
After a year of deliberation, the New York City Council decided to table the proposal. For now, developers will not be able to build taller skyscrapers in that neighborhood. That does not mean the plan is dead forever, however. It is only delayed, and debates such as this will continue, in New York and elsewhere. This is only one example of the complex questions facing developers in today's cities.