• huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The equivalent suburb would be 10x the emissions because people drive.

      NYC needs millions more units of housing: this is how that happens in the densest parts of the city.

      Need to density other parts: sure. But it’s good to have buildings anywhere we can get them in NYC.

        • huginn@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          If you don’t build shitty apartments for the rich they’ll just gentrify poor areas.

          More housing is more housing.

            • huginn@feddit.it
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              This is downtown Brooklyn - NYC. Building the apartments in your image would lower density where this skyscraper is being built.

              Luxury buildings in downtown Brooklyn are not for the super rich - they’re for the 1%ers who work at banks downtown, and will almost certainly be rental units which are pretty constantly booked.

              You don’t get how housing constrained NYC is.

                • huginn@feddit.it
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  We’re talking about Brooklyn NY

                  Do you know a single thing about Brooklyn NY?

                  Cause you don’t sound like you know a single thing about Brooklyn NY. Or about what it means to be housing constrained.