4 ms·
It's certainly not cheaper, for developers, to build highrise aparments in the city than upscale tract homes on tiny lots in an exurb. And environmental impacts
by temp-dude-87844 8y ago
It's certainly not cheaper, for developers, to build highrise aparments in the city than upscale tract homes on tiny lots in an exurb. And environmental impacts and the responsibility for transportation are both externalities easily pushed to someone else. This is what actually happens.
- tfehring 8y ago>It's certainly not cheaper, for developers, to build highrise aparments in the city than upscale tract homes on tiny lots in an exurb. Why's that? At the margin, at least, it seems unlikely that this is the case - it's probably quite a bit cheaper to add an additional floor to a 50 unit/floor high-rise (when it's being constructed, not after the fact) than to build 50 detached single-family homes in an exurb, for example. It's true that externalities can be, well, externalized, but that doesn't mean the difference in absolute costs shouldn't be considered. At the end of the day, someone still has to foot the bill.
- stale2002 8y agoIt costs a very small amount compared to the actual value that they create. Adding more houses in a place nobody wants to live is worth very little. Adding more apartments to a place EVERYONE wants to live is VERY valuable. I want developers to be doing the thing that everyone wants.