12 ms·

Something I don't get about America (and most of Europe) is that 10-story is seen like "wow, too big". I live in the 14th floor of a 18-story building (4 apart

Something I don't get about America (and most of Europe) is that 10-story is seen like "wow, too big". I live in the 14th floor of a 18-story building (4 apartments per floor), and next to me there are other ~20-story strictly residencial buildings. Life is amazing here, I have swimming pool, gym and sauna in the condo and it costs me next to nothing since the costs are shared between all residents. And it's never crowded. But the best part is that there's a positive side-effect: since I have everything at hand, I don't need to leave my home often and that made me switch to remote work full-time (the office started to seem boring). It means, I'm living in a densely populated building and commuting less than I was when I lived in a smaller apartment complex. I really think cities should consider this for their future: taller buildings with built-in amenities, ready for remote work. Make people want to live there and also don't want to commute. You get the density without the associated traffic congestion.

teakettle42 4y ago
I live in a three story, single family home located at the top of a hill, with views for miles, surrounded by wooded acreage, in an area zoned “forest”. Life is amazing here. I exercise outside, explore the landscape and the hiking trails surrounding me, and not only is it never crowded, it’s also safe, quiet, and beautiful. The best part is that since I have everything at hand, including natural beauty, I don’t want or need to leave my home often, and have worked remotely for a Bay Area company for several years. I often walk out my front door and go for a hike before starting my work day. Living in an 18-story building surrounded by 20-story buildings would be, for me, a hellish existence. You couldn’t pay me enough money to want to live there.
- leonidasv 4y ago
  Well, but those things can coexist. That's the difference between living in the heart of a metropolis vs living somewhere far away. Since I've grown in the countryside, surrounded by all the forests and hills, I really find the cosmopolitan life I've there more exciting. It may change overtime, sure, but at least I will never have to complain about having lost my time commuting.
  - teakettle42 4y ago
    > Well, but those things can coexist. In theory? They can coexist. If you want density, move to a dense city. In reality? Activists and developers are constantly pushing to upzone and pave over everything in sight.
  - nicolas_t 4y ago
    It does coexist in some cities, Hong Kong has amazing hiking trails less than 15 minutes from where I live while being one of the densest city in the world. Likewise Kyoto is a relatively big city, 30 minutes away by public transit from Osaka which is even bigger but there's easy access to nature (although in the last 5 years before covid it was overrun by tourists)
- throwaway6734 4y ago
  Who pays to maintain the roads, electricity, water, etc. to your house?
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    Electricity and water are usually close to 100% paid for by the bills and if not it's not exactly a big difference if they are. The roads and the occasional big investment in something like a water treatment plan are paid via taxes. The money taxes a circuitous route to get there since so much money goes to fed and state taxes who then fractionally fund these sorts of infrastructure upkeep things. Unless a community is exceptionally rich or poor the people living there pay roughly what it costs +/- a few percent. Rich communities get less because their taxes get redirected to poorer communities to a larger extent. If poorer communities were not benefits of this wealth transfer they find ways to make do with less but it wouldn't be the financial devastation that many here like to imply.
    - 300bps 4y ago
      Unless a community is exceptionally rich or poor the people living there pay roughly what it costs +/- a few percent. You’re not taking school taxes and costs into consideration. In my school district, they spend $18,211 per student each year. Average school taxes per house are $8,100. So a house with 1 child costs $10,111 per year. But the average house with children has 2.1 kids costing over $30,000 more than is paid in. This is a very common problem and why development, especially of larger homes (with likely more children) is a net drain on the local tax base.
      - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
        Schools are an infinite money pit. Their expenses grow to consume what is available. Likewise their expenses can be trimmed if the money is simply not available. As we've learned from pumping poorly performing schools full of money, expenditure is only loosely correlated with results.
      - frumper 4y ago
csomar 4y ago
It seems to me that's where most of the world is going (except America?). I moved yesterday in a similar setup in Istanbul. I could take the elevator down and in a 100m radius there is a coffee-shop, convenience store, gym, food places, and other commerce. There is also a co-working space in the next building. I've been in similar places in Bangkok/Kuala Lumpur.
- Sakos 4y ago
  America is seriously the only country that seems to think single use zoning is a good idea. Mixed use has always been the default in the rest of the world.
  - simongray 4y ago
    Canada too, I think.
sce 4y ago
I think the problem is that buildings like you describe don't contribute to the city at street level. If the residental buildings are smaller then the gym, sauna, swimming pool will have to be in the neighborhood available to everyone.
- leonidasv 4y ago
  I wouldn't swim in a "neighbourhood pool", doesn't seem hygienic. A neighbour gym would also be crowded all the time, all my friends that have to go out for the gym always complain about that. The public sauna seems ok, but I've never seem any of that in the streets besides "erotic saunas" that are not really intended for the same purposes...
  - watwut 4y ago
    > I wouldn't swim in a "neighbourhood pool", doesn't seem hygienic. It is as hygienic as any other swimming pool. Unless you literally have your own pool in your backyard, which overwhelming majority of swimmers dont, you are not getting more hygiene. > A neighbour gym would also be crowded all the time, all my friends that have to go out for the gym always complain about that. This may depend on locality, but fair solution to that is allowing simple capitalism and more businesses. Someone gonna build second gym.
    - nl 4y ago
      > It is as hygienic as any other swimming pool. Unless you literally have your own pool in your backyard, which overwhelming majority of swimmers dont, you are not getting more hygiene. (Former) private pool owner here. I'd bet most public neighborhood pools are much more hygienic than a private pool where we'd only test the water when algae started growing. Public pools have proper maintenance and much better systems for chlorination/salt cleaning.
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        One thing I learned from friends in Panama: a pool comes with a pool guy and if it doesn't it'll quite literally convert into a cesspool all by itself. Pools need regular upkeep and that's a lot of work.
hparadiz 4y ago
This sounds horrible to me. I don't want to share hallways or lobbies or parking lots or pools. When I lived in an apartment someone hit my brand new car. No such problems at my house. My house has a pool and hot tub. I can use it at 3 am if I want to and I don't have to even think about it. I have family in Europe too. They live in a 4 story townhome in a small German city with their own garage and driveway and front door very similar to American townhomes. It's the middle of town next to a three story American style mall built right into the town center near a castle tourist destination. But it's also so rural there's nothing if you drive even 10 minutes out of town. And there's nothing to do at night. They also own a small piece of land nearby where my grandparents hang out all day and grow food. In essence it's not much different from an American lifestyle just with excellent walkability and a train direct to Berlin or Hamburg
- bambax 4y ago
  > When I lived in an apartment someone hit my brand new car. The point is that you shouldn't need a car.
  - philwelch 4y ago
    You’ll own nothing and be happy.
    - ericmay 4y ago
      You’ll be forced to buy an expensive car, pay for insurance, maintain it, get in car crashes and become maimed, pay for gas, and advocate for politics that require massive amounts of death and destruction to secure your oil supply and you’ll be happy.
      - philwelch 4y ago
        Most people, given the choice, do prefer to own cars.
        4y ago
wink 4y ago
See, I've never actually heard about these sort of high rise mini neighborhoods here, I think we only have a handful of buildings that count as skyscrapers at all. Most building are actually 10 story or less and we have a huge amount of small terraced houses for one family.
aidenn0 4y ago
10 stories is expensive. 3-5 stories is less than half the cost while getting you halfway there to a 10-story building. My parents live in a condo in a 20 story building, and the fees to maintain the condo are more than a brownstone apartment costs in some areas.

teakettle42 4y ago

I live in a three story, single family home located at the top of a hill, with views for miles, surrounded by wooded acreage, in an area zoned “forest”. Life is amazing here. I exercise outside, explore the landscape and the hiking trails surrounding me, and not only is it never crowded, it’s also safe, quiet, and beautiful. The best part is that since I have everything at hand, including natural beauty, I don’t want or need to leave my home often, and have worked remotely for a Bay Area company for several years. I often walk out my front door and go for a hike before starting my work day. Living in an 18-story building surrounded by 20-story buildings would be, for me, a hellish existence. You couldn’t pay me enough money to want to live there.

leonidasv 4y ago
Well, but those things can coexist. That's the difference between living in the heart of a metropolis vs living somewhere far away. Since I've grown in the countryside, surrounded by all the forests and hills, I really find the cosmopolitan life I've there more exciting. It may change overtime, sure, but at least I will never have to complain about having lost my time commuting.
- teakettle42 4y ago
  > Well, but those things can coexist. In theory? They can coexist. If you want density, move to a dense city. In reality? Activists and developers are constantly pushing to upzone and pave over everything in sight.
- nicolas_t 4y ago
  It does coexist in some cities, Hong Kong has amazing hiking trails less than 15 minutes from where I live while being one of the densest city in the world. Likewise Kyoto is a relatively big city, 30 minutes away by public transit from Osaka which is even bigger but there's easy access to nature (although in the last 5 years before covid it was overrun by tourists)
throwaway6734 4y ago
Who pays to maintain the roads, electricity, water, etc. to your house?
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  Electricity and water are usually close to 100% paid for by the bills and if not it's not exactly a big difference if they are. The roads and the occasional big investment in something like a water treatment plan are paid via taxes. The money taxes a circuitous route to get there since so much money goes to fed and state taxes who then fractionally fund these sorts of infrastructure upkeep things. Unless a community is exceptionally rich or poor the people living there pay roughly what it costs +/- a few percent. Rich communities get less because their taxes get redirected to poorer communities to a larger extent. If poorer communities were not benefits of this wealth transfer they find ways to make do with less but it wouldn't be the financial devastation that many here like to imply.
  - 300bps 4y ago
    Unless a community is exceptionally rich or poor the people living there pay roughly what it costs +/- a few percent. You’re not taking school taxes and costs into consideration. In my school district, they spend $18,211 per student each year. Average school taxes per house are $8,100. So a house with 1 child costs $10,111 per year. But the average house with children has 2.1 kids costing over $30,000 more than is paid in. This is a very common problem and why development, especially of larger homes (with likely more children) is a net drain on the local tax base.
    - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
      Schools are an infinite money pit. Their expenses grow to consume what is available. Likewise their expenses can be trimmed if the money is simply not available. As we've learned from pumping poorly performing schools full of money, expenditure is only loosely correlated with results.
    - frumper 4y ago

csomar 4y ago

It seems to me that's where most of the world is going (except America?). I moved yesterday in a similar setup in Istanbul. I could take the elevator down and in a 100m radius there is a coffee-shop, convenience store, gym, food places, and other commerce. There is also a co-working space in the next building. I've been in similar places in Bangkok/Kuala Lumpur.

Sakos 4y ago
America is seriously the only country that seems to think single use zoning is a good idea. Mixed use has always been the default in the rest of the world.
- simongray 4y ago
  Canada too, I think.

sce 4y ago

I think the problem is that buildings like you describe don't contribute to the city at street level. If the residental buildings are smaller then the gym, sauna, swimming pool will have to be in the neighborhood available to everyone.

leonidasv 4y ago
I wouldn't swim in a "neighbourhood pool", doesn't seem hygienic. A neighbour gym would also be crowded all the time, all my friends that have to go out for the gym always complain about that. The public sauna seems ok, but I've never seem any of that in the streets besides "erotic saunas" that are not really intended for the same purposes...
- watwut 4y ago
  > I wouldn't swim in a "neighbourhood pool", doesn't seem hygienic. It is as hygienic as any other swimming pool. Unless you literally have your own pool in your backyard, which overwhelming majority of swimmers dont, you are not getting more hygiene. > A neighbour gym would also be crowded all the time, all my friends that have to go out for the gym always complain about that. This may depend on locality, but fair solution to that is allowing simple capitalism and more businesses. Someone gonna build second gym.
  - nl 4y ago
    > It is as hygienic as any other swimming pool. Unless you literally have your own pool in your backyard, which overwhelming majority of swimmers dont, you are not getting more hygiene. (Former) private pool owner here. I'd bet most public neighborhood pools are much more hygienic than a private pool where we'd only test the water when algae started growing. Public pools have proper maintenance and much better systems for chlorination/salt cleaning.
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      One thing I learned from friends in Panama: a pool comes with a pool guy and if it doesn't it'll quite literally convert into a cesspool all by itself. Pools need regular upkeep and that's a lot of work.

hparadiz 4y ago

This sounds horrible to me. I don't want to share hallways or lobbies or parking lots or pools. When I lived in an apartment someone hit my brand new car. No such problems at my house. My house has a pool and hot tub. I can use it at 3 am if I want to and I don't have to even think about it. I have family in Europe too. They live in a 4 story townhome in a small German city with their own garage and driveway and front door very similar to American townhomes. It's the middle of town next to a three story American style mall built right into the town center near a castle tourist destination. But it's also so rural there's nothing if you drive even 10 minutes out of town. And there's nothing to do at night. They also own a small piece of land nearby where my grandparents hang out all day and grow food. In essence it's not much different from an American lifestyle just with excellent walkability and a train direct to Berlin or Hamburg

bambax 4y ago
> When I lived in an apartment someone hit my brand new car. The point is that you shouldn't need a car.
- philwelch 4y ago
  You’ll own nothing and be happy.
  - ericmay 4y ago
    You’ll be forced to buy an expensive car, pay for insurance, maintain it, get in car crashes and become maimed, pay for gas, and advocate for politics that require massive amounts of death and destruction to secure your oil supply and you’ll be happy.
    - philwelch 4y ago
      Most people, given the choice, do prefer to own cars.
      - 4y ago

wink 4y ago

See, I've never actually heard about these sort of high rise mini neighborhoods here, I think we only have a handful of buildings that count as skyscrapers at all. Most building are actually 10 story or less and we have a huge amount of small terraced houses for one family.

aidenn0 4y ago

10 stories is expensive. 3-5 stories is less than half the cost while getting you halfway there to a 10-story building. My parents live in a condo in a 20 story building, and the fees to maintain the condo are more than a brownstone apartment costs in some areas.