4 ms·
> Is Manhattan considered a mistake It's not so much a 'mistake' as it is an instant feeling of "no living thing could ever afford Manhattan". It's like a phys
by maxsilver 8y ago
> Is Manhattan considered a mistake
It's not so much a 'mistake' as it is an instant feeling of "no living thing could ever afford Manhattan". It's like a physical manifestation of the saying, "no one ever goes there anymore, it's too crowded".
> (Manhattan is) one of the most desirable residences and tourist destinations in the world, everyone is deathly allergic to even the slightest hint that someone might want to replicate it elsewhere.
Sure, absolutely. And Lamborghinis are some of the most desirable cars in the world. But if you told everyone in Milwaukee that all other cars were being destroyed ('upzoned' into Lambos) and all Milwaukee citizens would be forced to buy a Lambo or never drive in Milwaukee again -- residents would be freaking out in a similar way.
Personally, I actually like high-rises. I like the look, I like the use of space, and I like the lifestyle. But even as a person with a decent tech income, I could never afford to live in one (in any city, anywhere in the US). And I would be terrified if my city became even 10% more similar to Manhattan, because people already struggle to afford living here as it is.
Try telling families that can't afford $200k-$300k houses that their city should "be like Manhattan" and they hear "you should be paying 1 million to 4 million dollars for a 3 bed apartment, just like Manhattan".
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- closeparen 8y agoI think we can all agree that there's a relationship between expensive real-estate markets and high-density structures. But are the buildings a cause, or an effect? And if the reason to restrict density is cost, 1) how do we explain the participation of homeowners, and 2) how do we square this with the other ways people invest in their neighborhoods?
- projektfu 8y agoThey don't have to be very expensive. High rises that subdivide to 1000-2000 sq. ft. have reasonably priced homes in Atlanta and Chicago, depending on location. 4000 sq. ft. is on the expensive side, but cheaper than a similarly sized townhome.
- inferiorhuman 8y ago> no living thing could ever afford Manhattan I stayed for a week at a hotel in Midtown, in February for about $80/night. Not a great hotel, but there were no bed bugs, rodents, or roaches. That's well below what most folks consider the median rent to be in San Francisco. Plus someone cleaned the place every day.
- subway 8y agoHotel Penn is damn near the only place you'll find a rate like that, and if that's where you stayed, it sounds like you got one of the nicer rooms.
- inferiorhuman 8y agoIt was the Watson near Columbus Circle. The room probably hadn't been redecorated in the better part of thirty years, but I'd happily stay there again.
- cimmanom 8y agoWhereas the truth is that the only way to bring rent and home prices down where demand outstrips supply and space is limited is to build higher.
- fsloth 8y ago"Sure, absolutely. And Lamborghinis are some of the most desirable cars in the world." Isn't this a false parable? I thought houses themselves are not expensive, but the land on which they are built, is. I.e. high rises are expensive in US because they are built in areas with high market demand - not that 'a highrise' would necessarily need to be expensive. I might be totally wrong here, please educate me.
- dnr 8y agoThe high price is because there isn't enough of it now. If you make more of it (or something even sort of close to it), the price will fall.