Re:Welcome to the Future: Middle-Class Housing Projects
by clock_tower on Saturday April 02, 2016 @06:12PM
(#11413762)
How about until we've turned them into Boston? Boston and Manhattan are congested, admittedly, but Boston at least (I can't personally speak for Manhattan) is a wonderful place to live. It's a normal, natural, _human_ city, with medium-height buildings and mixed commercial and residential land use (businesses at street level, residences above and sometimes below); it's a far cry from the typical suburban wasteland, half Le Corbousier and half Leave it to Beaver.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Welcome to the Future: Middle-Class Housing Projects
by msellout on Sunday April 03, 2016 @07:06PM
(#11418260)
Boston is much less dense than Manhattan and much more pleasant to walk in. Some of it is that there are fewer skyscrapers to block the sun. Some of it is the colors -- more red brick and green trees.
Re:Welcome to the Future: Middle-Class Housing Projects
by clock_tower on Monday April 04, 2016 @08:53PM
(#11427004)
I agree strongly. But Boston as well as Manhattan is denser than SF (from what I've heard of SF); in answer to teacup50's question, I'd say "first develop to Boston levels, which are clearly still humane and habitable, then revisit the density issue after that."