3 ms·
But why oh why does everything need to be in Paris ? We're not retards in Lyon, Rouen or Bordeau. Even Marseille can handle some stuff. See the point ? Why wast
by xwolfi 3y ago
But why oh why does everything need to be in Paris ? We're not retards in Lyon, Rouen or Bordeau. Even Marseille can handle some stuff. See the point ? Why waste to hyper densify one crappy city/area when we could spread development keeping low density ?
Or maybe I guess I mean: low density provide more benefit to more people than hyper density, the only future proposed by OP, will ever compensate due to "low rent" (which will explode once there's not one single meter square free left), because once you chose SF as the only IT hub that ever will be and commit for 25 years of future development, then no IT worker will ever think of any other city and will move there faster than you're building anyway. Just like Paris for French people: the only place I wanted to go after Uni was there, because that's the only place with interesting/important/paid jobs: isn't THIS the issue ?
- gnopgnip 3y agoBuilding housing where people want to live is a good thing Low density development isn't sustainable because it greatly increases transportation costs, long term maintenance costs aren't sustainable
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoTransportation costs in hyper dense cities are not cheap either. Tokyo spends a lot of money on new metro infrastructure, they have a world class system but it isn’t cheaper per person than what they have in other smaller cities.