4 ms·

You describe advantages of transportation and location around the building, not advantages of the building itself. Because crammed building like this usually al

You describe advantages of transportation and location around the building, not advantages of the building itself. Because crammed building like this usually also means smaller living space, problem with sound from/to neighbors and the street, if you live on a high floor - you need to go up and down (and hope that there's no problem with elevator). You say that nature is too far, but if you have nice garden you can have nature one step away (also, there should be more parks, regardless of if it's suburbia or a city, but it's cheaper to have a park in suburbia). I think best solution is combination of individual homes and apartment buildings (just not giant ones), so we could increase population density and there could be some shops and cafes in walk/bike ride distance. You don't need to always go to walmart to get a load of bread, for that you can occasionally ride there. And self driving cars will only help here.

paganel 9y ago
> you need to go up and down (and hope that there's no problem with elevator). For the last 7 years I've been only living on the 7th and 8th floor, I think only twice I had problems with the elevator. > also means smaller living space I'm very fine with that, I don't need huge spaces to live all of by myself (or with my wife + kids). As a matter of fact I have several coffee shops on a 10-minute walk radius, there's where I also spend most of my free time. > You say that nature is too far, but if you have nice garden you can have nature one step away (also, there should be more parks, regardless of if it's suburbia or a city, but it's cheaper to have a park in suburbia). I don't have that much spare time, and as such I don't have time for gardening (plus, I don't like it). On top of that, "raw" nature beats "gardened" nature by several orders of magnitude. I want my kids to be able to wander by themselves in wild-ish forests just outside the city (as I used to do as a kid, while I was living in an communist apartment building), I don't want them to enjoy the sort of "manicured" nature that the suburbia promotes.
- aquadrop 9y ago
  > For the last 7 years I've been only living on the 7th and 8th floor, I think only twice I had problems with the elevator. Still it's a bother, especially if you're a senior citizen. Also you still spend much time just waiting for an elevator and riding it, > I'm very fine with that, I don't need huge spaces to live all of by myself (or with my wife + kids). As a matter of fact I have several coffee shops on a 10-minute walk radius, there's where I also spend most of my free time. That's ok, but many people would like something more than a 50 m^2 flat and don't spend most of free time in coffee shops. > I don't have that much spare time, and as such I don't have time for gardening (plus, I don't like it). On top of that, "raw" nature beats "gardened" nature by several orders of magnitude I don't mean some fancy garden, just grass and maybe some trees/bushes. And I don't agree that raw nature beats it by several orders of magnitude, of course someone likes it better, and it's no mountains, but it's still real trees, real flower and real grass. > I want my kids to be able to wander by themselves in wild-ish forests just outside the city (as I used to do as a kid, while I was living in an communist apartment building), I don't want them to enjoy the sort of "manicured" nature that the suburbia promotes. If you want that than living in a large city is really not an answer. Your kids only can do that if you live on the very edge of the city. And suburbia has more places like that because it has more edges (there's many detached patched of sprawl). Or you can live in a very small city.
lorenzhs 9y ago
You ignore that those advantages require the density of housing provided by the kind of building described by paganel. You can't have low-density housing surrounded by lots of cafés and supermarkets, the economics just don't work out.
- aquadrop 9y ago
  You don't need that giant dense buildings for that and you don't need "lots" of cafes etc. 3-4 in a walking distance is better than nothing like in average suburbs. There's thousands people living in 20 minute walk radius and if you add bike ride here, it's even more. Put cluster of reasonably large apartment buildings as a core, cafes and shops in this area and individual homes sprawl around it. I'm sure we can find at what scale economics does work.
shard 9y ago
Any apartment built in the last 10~15 years should not have those problems. Here is a rendering of an apartment in Gangnam, Seoul, one of the densest cities in the world (about 2x of New York). http://ojsfile.ohmynews.com/STD_IMG_FILE/2016/0330/IE001941286_STD.jpg http://ojsfile.ohmynews.com/STD_IMG_FILE/2016/0330/IE0019412... As you can see, the apartments have parks and playgrounds surrounding it. The short building in the corner is a commercial building, usually with restaurants, cafes, markets, education classrooms, all within short walking distance. Number of elevators typically scale with the building height, the ones in the picture probably have 2~3 elevators, making the possibility that all are out of service unlikely. There's no real problem with street noise (I've lived on the 3rd floor) and with neighbors in typical circumstances (barring things like construction or moving day). Popular starter apartments are around 80m^2 2 bedroom apartments, moving up to 115m^2 3 bedrooms as families get bigger and more established. This might be a problem for you if you like large places to live while living in a city, but that is an anomaly in recent times, I believe, based on what I've seen of older buildings in New York and LA. These kinds of apartments are common even in the suburbs, where there is much less space constraint to need this kind of density, but the density makes everything much more convenient, attracting and being able to sustain more local businesses, which is why even in the suburbs you can have access to half a dozen coffee shops within walking distance.

paganel 9y ago

> you need to go up and down (and hope that there's no problem with elevator). For the last 7 years I've been only living on the 7th and 8th floor, I think only twice I had problems with the elevator. > also means smaller living space I'm very fine with that, I don't need huge spaces to live all of by myself (or with my wife + kids). As a matter of fact I have several coffee shops on a 10-minute walk radius, there's where I also spend most of my free time. > You say that nature is too far, but if you have nice garden you can have nature one step away (also, there should be more parks, regardless of if it's suburbia or a city, but it's cheaper to have a park in suburbia). I don't have that much spare time, and as such I don't have time for gardening (plus, I don't like it). On top of that, "raw" nature beats "gardened" nature by several orders of magnitude. I want my kids to be able to wander by themselves in wild-ish forests just outside the city (as I used to do as a kid, while I was living in an communist apartment building), I don't want them to enjoy the sort of "manicured" nature that the suburbia promotes.

aquadrop 9y ago
> For the last 7 years I've been only living on the 7th and 8th floor, I think only twice I had problems with the elevator. Still it's a bother, especially if you're a senior citizen. Also you still spend much time just waiting for an elevator and riding it, > I'm very fine with that, I don't need huge spaces to live all of by myself (or with my wife + kids). As a matter of fact I have several coffee shops on a 10-minute walk radius, there's where I also spend most of my free time. That's ok, but many people would like something more than a 50 m^2 flat and don't spend most of free time in coffee shops. > I don't have that much spare time, and as such I don't have time for gardening (plus, I don't like it). On top of that, "raw" nature beats "gardened" nature by several orders of magnitude I don't mean some fancy garden, just grass and maybe some trees/bushes. And I don't agree that raw nature beats it by several orders of magnitude, of course someone likes it better, and it's no mountains, but it's still real trees, real flower and real grass. > I want my kids to be able to wander by themselves in wild-ish forests just outside the city (as I used to do as a kid, while I was living in an communist apartment building), I don't want them to enjoy the sort of "manicured" nature that the suburbia promotes. If you want that than living in a large city is really not an answer. Your kids only can do that if you live on the very edge of the city. And suburbia has more places like that because it has more edges (there's many detached patched of sprawl). Or you can live in a very small city.

lorenzhs 9y ago

You ignore that those advantages require the density of housing provided by the kind of building described by paganel. You can't have low-density housing surrounded by lots of cafés and supermarkets, the economics just don't work out.

aquadrop 9y ago
You don't need that giant dense buildings for that and you don't need "lots" of cafes etc. 3-4 in a walking distance is better than nothing like in average suburbs. There's thousands people living in 20 minute walk radius and if you add bike ride here, it's even more. Put cluster of reasonably large apartment buildings as a core, cafes and shops in this area and individual homes sprawl around it. I'm sure we can find at what scale economics does work.

shard 9y ago

Any apartment built in the last 10~15 years should not have those problems. Here is a rendering of an apartment in Gangnam, Seoul, one of the densest cities in the world (about 2x of New York). http://ojsfile.ohmynews.com/STD_IMG_FILE/2016/0330/IE001941286_STD.jpg http://ojsfile.ohmynews.com/STD_IMG_FILE/2016/0330/IE0019412... As you can see, the apartments have parks and playgrounds surrounding it. The short building in the corner is a commercial building, usually with restaurants, cafes, markets, education classrooms, all within short walking distance. Number of elevators typically scale with the building height, the ones in the picture probably have 2~3 elevators, making the possibility that all are out of service unlikely. There's no real problem with street noise (I've lived on the 3rd floor) and with neighbors in typical circumstances (barring things like construction or moving day). Popular starter apartments are around 80m^2 2 bedroom apartments, moving up to 115m^2 3 bedrooms as families get bigger and more established. This might be a problem for you if you like large places to live while living in a city, but that is an anomaly in recent times, I believe, based on what I've seen of older buildings in New York and LA. These kinds of apartments are common even in the suburbs, where there is much less space constraint to need this kind of density, but the density makes everything much more convenient, attracting and being able to sustain more local businesses, which is why even in the suburbs you can have access to half a dozen coffee shops within walking distance.