5 ms·

> But such policy might be impossible in historical city centers such as Paris where buildings have historical value, and are probably one of the reasons for to

> But such policy might be impossible in historical city centers such as Paris where buildings have historical value, and are probably one of the reasons for tourism in the first place. How many percent of buildings have any significant historical value? Maybe 2%?

HWR_14 6y ago
Have specific historic value? Probably very few. But if they were replaced by generic high rises it would eliminate that Parisian feeling. They could let more people live in Venice by fixing the sinking and filling the canals, but that doesn't seem worth it.
- ErikVandeWater 6y ago
  > if they were replaced by generic high rises That's a false dichotomy. New buildings could replace old buildings while maintaining the same style.
  - HWR_14 6y ago
    >> if they were replaced by generic high rises >That's a false dichotomy. New buildings could replace old buildings while maintaining the same style. If it's the same style, than it will have similar or the same occupancy. More dense housing will simply look different. It will have to.
matkoniecz 6y ago
In Kraków Old Town? Around 99% (also it is UNESCO World Heritage Site and so on) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krak%C3%B3w_Old_Town https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krak%C3%B3w_Old_Town https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.06160/19.93683 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.06160/19.93683 And "rebuild most of city due to tourism" has its own costs. I would prefer to simply have less of a tourism. For start remove nasty parts like stag/hen parties and people traveling here because alcohol is cheap, they are anyway providing only worst kind of jobs. Maybe make city famous that being drunk, yelling and vomiting during night causes you to be stopped by police? And dumb parties of "rent a roofless car, drive around and be loud during middle of the night" type gets ruined?

HWR_14 6y ago

Have specific historic value? Probably very few. But if they were replaced by generic high rises it would eliminate that Parisian feeling. They could let more people live in Venice by fixing the sinking and filling the canals, but that doesn't seem worth it.

ErikVandeWater 6y ago
> if they were replaced by generic high rises That's a false dichotomy. New buildings could replace old buildings while maintaining the same style.
- HWR_14 6y ago
  >> if they were replaced by generic high rises >That's a false dichotomy. New buildings could replace old buildings while maintaining the same style. If it's the same style, than it will have similar or the same occupancy. More dense housing will simply look different. It will have to.

matkoniecz 6y ago

In Kraków Old Town? Around 99% (also it is UNESCO World Heritage Site and so on) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krak%C3%B3w_Old_Town https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krak%C3%B3w_Old_Town https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.06160/19.93683 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.06160/19.93683 And "rebuild most of city due to tourism" has its own costs. I would prefer to simply have less of a tourism. For start remove nasty parts like stag/hen parties and people traveling here because alcohol is cheap, they are anyway providing only worst kind of jobs. Maybe make city famous that being drunk, yelling and vomiting during night causes you to be stopped by police? And dumb parties of "rent a roofless car, drive around and be loud during middle of the night" type gets ruined?