View Single Post
  #3131  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2019, 9:14 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by jitterbug View Post
Many people are rightfully troubled that, other than as an architectural curiosity, the super-tall condos add little if anything to the fabric of the city.
Uh, no. They're NIMBYs who hate all development.

If they were around when the ESB and Chrysler went up they would have the exact same complaints. Perhaps worse, because those buildings were gigantic for the time, and on bigger footprints, were initially largely empty, and both replaced gorgeous landmarks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jitterbug View Post
This is especially egregious when the units are used mainly as a cottage (or simply an investment) by people who have no interest or ties to the neighbourhood or the city more generally.
This is untrue. These units are mostly occupied by locals.

But if it were true, and it was nothing but foreigners, who cares? We're supposed to be opposed to buildings if they aren't using city services? Shouldn't we be happy? Doesn't that make for a more prosperous city? Aren't you happy that foreigners are paying for hundreds of units of mandatory inclusionary housing elsewhere in the city that otherwise wouldn't exist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jitterbug View Post
This is obviously not exclusively a New York problem -- just look at what's happening in London, Toronto, Vancouver, and other desirable (and very expensive) cities.
You're mixing up all kinds of stuff. What's happening in London is different from what's happening in Vancouver, which is different than what's happening in NYC. I don't think this thread is the place to correct all your misconceptions, but in short Vancouver is just parked Chinese wealth and London has very favorable domicile laws. NYC doesn't have either issue.