English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Many suburban towns continue to expand area-wise, we clear so much forest every year, that in 50 years we won't have any forest left.
-Thus more stess on people
-Thus more Global warming
-Thus dirty air

Why don't we start building high in stead of wide? I mean instead of building 50 luxury condos, you could build a 25 story apartment building. That would be more expensive, but if we all built like that, we could save a lot of natural resorces and land.

2006-10-12 08:53:39 · 7 answers · asked by rockability 1 in Business & Finance Renting & Real Estate

7 answers

YOur idea is not new - this is exactly why people build tall buildings - it is more cost effective than building 'out' in places where land costs a lot (NYC). This is the free market at work!

2006-10-12 09:01:40 · answer #1 · answered by fffrrreeeddd 4 · 0 0

Okay you are right. But, then again it's money and profits. In the short term if you build a 50 unit condo and sell all the units then you are done. If you build a 25 story apartment building which would house 4-12 tenants per floor, that sould be approximately say on the average of 10 people per floor around 250 people instead of maybe 120 people for the condo. You've impacted the same area with twice as many people, more cars, trash, crime etc. Who pays for the services, the building owners through property taxes, who may or may not be the original builder. And the apt. owner now has to provide common area services for the tenants. It takes a wise city to plan it properly, single family dwellings that most people want, apartments for those who cannot afford a SFR, luxury units to pump up the tax rolls. Shopping mall to help with the taxes, sales and property taxes. Who wants to say what can be built here or not when the bottom line is whether the city infrastructure of police, water, power, fire dept. and city services can provide it given a tax structure.

It's not easy as saying why not build higher. There are reasons. And no one seems to want to or can come up with a good plan.

Look at the earth itself. They scientist say the earth can support 2 billion with the natural processes and we have close to 5 billion on this planet and who is going to say who lives and dies?

2006-10-12 19:30:05 · answer #2 · answered by gbdelta1954 6 · 0 0

Good idea and I think that the trend is going in that direction in many large cities. Part of the problem and the answer to your question is that building up is still very expensive likely due to technology. But also, cities can be very political and the height of building has to comply with city (zoning) requirements. Lots of arguments in city hall regarding zoning regulations. Good observation, though.

2006-10-12 18:35:45 · answer #3 · answered by jd 2 · 0 0

You answered your own question. It is much more expensive to build up than across. There are no financial incentives to build this way, except when the land is very expensive (e.g., NYC)

2006-10-12 17:33:54 · answer #4 · answered by Ethan 2 · 0 0

Hey man, stop chopping up the rain forests. Free peace love man. Green peace. You're a hippy. Do you enjoy being a hippy?

2006-10-12 16:03:51 · answer #5 · answered by Ice 4 · 0 0

where it's cheaper to build higher, they are building higher. taller buildings cost much more to build, so land prices need to be very high to justify it.

2006-10-12 16:52:29 · answer #6 · answered by Stanley 3 · 0 0

Everyone is missing the bottom line problem to the answer (did 10cc say that?)--everything-every problem- boils down to over-population. Easy answer? NO! But if one is not found; flush the planet good bye. Thanks for listening.

2006-10-12 16:12:59 · answer #7 · answered by jrr_hill 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers