Apartment Towers Are Good, Actually

[@OhTheUrbanity]

For more on high-rises and density, check out: 1. This recent video by Paige Saunders: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bWTXeIeGfaloe8U 2. Our first video on towers: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jnfIpHSed8qarNk

[@coolnewpants]

Thank you for mentioning noise concerns in this video! It's the one huge thing that I think a lot of urbanists in favor of apartment living ignore. I would very much be interested in more videos about noise concerns when living in an apartment. The cheap, thin-wall construction that so many developers favor (or a forced into because of building costs/regulations) are simply inadequate. It affects residents' mental wellbeing to have no control over the noise disruptions at all hours of the night from their neighbors.

[@zimelo6957]

Awesome video, but some soft background music would be amazing.

[@lzh4950]

@@coolnewpants My countrymen were also concerned about loss of noise insulation when we switched from using reinforced concrete to steel for our public housing apartment buildings due to a sand export ban by other supplying countries

[@HarryLovesRuth]

This is what I love about this channel. Y'all consistently acknowledge that different people have different needs and priorities that will necessitate a variety of options. Far to many people want to redesign the urban landscape to match the ideal in their heads and then complain when other people want something different.

[@موسى_7]

People who are not educated in urban planning want a world where everyone is rich, everyone owns a farm where people work for them while they drink tea, but if everyone is drinking tea, who is working on the farm? How can we be rich if there is no working class? People lack an understanding of economics. This is the flaw of democracy. But dictatorships have bigger flaws.

[@silenthermit4637]

@@موسى_7 That's not really a flaw of Democracy , it's simply the lack of proper education on Economics , and people's Anti-Intellectualism tendencies

[@TohaBgood2]

@@silenthermit4637 This is also true, but he's right that no matter what level of education you provide country-wide or community-wide, the general population's views will always lag the expert views. Basically, the expert opinion will perpetually be ahead of the general population's outdate opinion on any given subject. In some cases this leads to the experts getting very frustrated, especially when the topic is life-or-death or of urgent importance. In this case, basically any urban planning undergrad will tell you that we do cities wrong in North America. But even the odd "housing activist" will sometimes still believe that we need to prioritize "shadows" and low density, or "home ownership", or something similar. You often see people advocating for "100% affordable or no development at all", but any expert will tell you that that is dumb and that any new housing will relieve housing price pressure to some extent. With affordable housing development being unprofitable by design and very hard to fund, a market rate development is all we can ever get in some places. But those often get blocked by the exact same activists who say that they want to make housing affordable!

[@KyurekiHana]

The main issue is that preferences are being denied, and have been for so long. The reason people like myself want to redesign the urban landscape is that housing has gotten to such an absurd cost that it's becoming impossible for people of my age or younger to actually live. I have grown up in the Pacific Northwest, and we can't keep letting the city maintain its 75% housing just because the rich few want their yards.

[@TohaBgood2]

@@KyurekiHana It's not even that they want their yards, they can keep those! They want other people to be forced to have yards! It's a ridiculous idea that we have somehow normalized and are now accepting as a given. But why should some millionaire home owner that is pretending to be "working class" tell me how I have to live? What if I want to live in a townhouse or a three-story "garden-apartment" building? Why does some dude somewhere have the right to tell me where and how I can live? It's just complete nonsense. We have allowed a handful of loud and crazy NIMBYs to run our cities for too long. We just need to cut this out and start building normal mid-rise cities like everyone else on the planet.

[@Jay-nk6dm]

This just brings us back to the original point: Stop illegalizing a certain type of housing. each type has benefits, and if people didnt like them, they wouldnt be used!

[@Train_Chaser-KeiTruckUrbanist]

THIS

[@simonboulanger7335]

Another point about the elevator: When you have a young child, carrying the stroller up the stairs is very annoying. I wish there were more 3-4 rooms condos with elevators available. Not every family wants to live in a detached home in the suburbs and drive a car.

[@KateeAngel]

True

[@Erintii]

I noticed that in my neighbourhood people are living strollers near the building entrance, most buildings have dedicated space for those. This is not in Canada, this is in Switzerland and I think it's great solution for people with small kids.

[@simonboulanger7335]

@@Erintii I'm lucky to have some space in my current apartment but our previous one didn't have it and it sucked.

[@TrickiVicBB71]

Working as a courier. I noticed that pretty quick in my city. Many 3/4 condos and apartments with no elevators. Carrying up a 50lb object the stairs or a stroller in your case. It sucks

[@Erintii]

@@simonboulanger7335 This is great

[@Erintii]

I lived in a tower building in Toronto. The overall experience was positive, I didn't have views but grocery store, hairdresser and basic amenities at my doorstep. A friend of mine lives in low-rise, 3 storey building in midtown and she is also positive. For me it doesn't matter if this is tower or not as long as space is walkable and I remain car-independent.

[@ee-ef8qr]

I remeber staying in one during a vactaion in korea 11 years ago. It was prett comfortable.

[@coolioso808]

Good points. It's not about the height of the building as much as it is about the amenities nearby that make it more livable and enjoyable. I live in a 3-story apartment building in a small Canadian city, but there isn't a nearby grocery store (there used to be an easily walkable corner store, now the grocery store is on a main, busy street just on the edge of a 15-minute walk away) and there isn't a gym or pool anywhere close. That's probably missing in most designs of apartment complexes. The area I live there are a series of apartment buildings nearby. I often think, if only, part of the development was a central gym and pool (since it's Canada, it might as well be an indoor pool and gym (and I mean gymnasium, not just a weights and machines gym) for the many residences to share use of. Kind of like the old idea of a community centre, that has gone by the wayside over the years. I know it's a 'bigger cost' to developers to put in gyms and pools and consider ground-floor shop space for basic things like grocery store, hair salon or clothing store, but the long-term negative affects of people having to hop in their cars and drive cross-city for something that COULD have been just put nearby each circle of residential density is pretty insane. Of course not every shop and service can be right down the street, and that's where good public transit along with safe walking and biking paths can be a great benefit. I hope to see more people advocating for better city development. More of the 15-minute neighbourhood principles.

[@Erintii]

@@coolioso808 In my old tower in Toronto I had gym and pool. Personally I didn't care as I am not a sport's person but know a lot of people care for gym. During my five years I used gym less than 10 times and pool never. For me walkability is a dealbreaker. I live now in Switzerland, groceries are in a walking distance, bus and tram stops even closer. There are plenty of gyms located near bus stops so if someone wants can easily get there by public transit. Same for sport centers.

[@exploshaun]

As someone who lived in a tall building since childhood, I don't understand why people don't like tall buildings.

[@betula2137]

NIMBYs need to see the 0.04% gradient from the horizon being obstructed by them or else they will be bereft of sky nutritions, sunlight from overshadowing 20km away, and too many cars in the suburbs (but not their own)

[@eleanor8652]

Fear of heights, maybe?

[@wclifton968gameplaystutorials]

It's because much of the high-rises look really ugly or at least the ones built here in the UK using "brutalist" architecture style. There is also the problem of building quality, not sure if this applies to elsewhere but in the UK + Isle of Man, most tower blocks were built between 1950s-1980s and the ones built between 1950s-1970s are of particularly bad quality mainly pertaining to the construction method of using prefabricated panels whereby builders replaced steel bots with newspaper or just left the holes blank which reduced the structural rigidity once the concrete was poured in and builders also failed to tell site management if there were missing parts, incorrectly manufactured parts and/or defective parts (e.g. holes being too small or too large for bolts to properly fit into) and this main problem was shown during the 1960s Ronan Point disaster where an entire building corner collapsed due to a gas leak only ~4months after residents started moving in plus in the 1980s in (I think it was either Edinborough or Glasgow, not sure though) there was a documentary that was made showing the demolition of an entire housing estate which was caused by residents refusing to move back in because of how bad the tower blocks were from being moldy to site inspectors breifely removing some wall parts so that the concrete could be exposed only to see empty holes and holes with newspaper inside right where steel bolts were meant to be and all these fears would later by compounded by the 2017 Grenfell Tower Fire which was built ~5 years after Ronan Point and was designed completely differently. I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the UK, most of the hatred towards large, tall apartment buildings come from people who have either lived inside one, currently lives inside one, has been inside one or many or lives nearby one and is in almost all cases not hated by NIMBYs as they generally oppose new construction of tower blocks and not so much the demolition of existing structures...

[@ericr.7311]

They look rather ugly and inhuman for me, though I have to say I never lived in one before. I’d prefer rowhouses/townhouses and such.

[@spektriye]

Idk my grandma always says "I wouldn't want to live on a high rise" when I shit on suburbs

[@FGH9G]

6:58 "We wish people were better at separating their housing *preferences* from their housing *policy."* This. Holy crap THANK YOU. Take notes everybody. I am so sick and tired of the word "preference" being thrown around left and right when deciding housing and zoning laws, and especially the many analysis and commentary videos on housing crisis related videos and articles, especially on official news sites like CNBC. The amount of times that so-called experts and professionals, and even economists use any variation of the word 'preference' when for example, why only single family homes were sold in a given market, they say stuff like, "Oh, that's just people's preference!" or "Oh the reason why sprawling car dependent suburbs are the dominant forms of urban development is because, oh that's just what people 'prefer'." No. Just NO, the hell it isn't. The reason why only those things are sold is because those are the only things ALLOWED to be sold. They NEVER talk about how strict zoning laws prohibit the sale of literally anything else! Man this word can grind my gears sometimes haha.

[@موسى_7]

People prefer Mercedes. But we don't ban cheap cars. People prefer expensive housing. We ban cheap housing. Strange.

[@FGH9G]

@@موسى_7 Exactly!!!

[@beyondEV]

In Switzerland City mostly are zoned for 3-4 floor, only (either residential, commercial, or mixed). City Centers are historical / 5-6 floors around the modern part of the center. High Rise zoning is rare. This made completely sense when it was done this way. But since, the population has grown massively. But because changing zoning needs to be approved by public vote, and people living near the area "don't want to live in the shadow of a skyscraper", it's hard to actually rezone a area to allow higher building. unless it's a large enough area, we all the owners agree to spend to big money to switch over, there is going to be a lot of opposition. (to floors of the existing buildings do in a sense get devalued since the lose the view). Due to high land value, everything built is built to last. which makes it even harder. no one wants to tear down a building, to replace it with higher one. it would make housing more affordable, but for a property owner it means a big investment, while rent income and land value would start to decline. simply using keep the existing building is far more profitable. meanwhile both the train network and the road network are overcrowded, since people rather build in existing zones further out from the city center. Living in the city you probably pay 25% more rent, while living outside, you get your way to work costs heavenly subsidized by the tax payer. Nobody in politics dares to tell the people, that living outside the city is actually a luxury. Don't get me wrong, about 58% rent and probably 65% life in multifamily homes. (urban sprawl limits at work.) So be now means the kind of sprawl you have in North America.

[@fallenshallrise]

There are so many restrictions, laws, zoning that have nothing to do with safety but are just part of some master plan dreamed up in the '50s. Well the plan has failed. Buy some property anywhere, even rural, and try to put a multi-family unit there and it's impossible. We don't drive 1950s cars or use 1950s computers so why are we still living the 1950s dream that land is cheap and plentiful and that any 20 year old with an entry level wage can afford to buy a house, a car, and start having kids.

[@Sam-ip6co]

I don't consider myself an Urbanist, and this is my favorite urban planning channel. Videos are always realistic and down to earth. The same can't be said about most people on this side of youtube. This is how you reach people who don't already agree with you, and change minds! Great job.

[@carfreeneoliberalgeorgisty5102]

They're not to everyone's taste but I actually really like highrise towers whether they're used as office/commercial space, residential space, or a mix of the 2. I would happily live in a high-rise city like Hong Kong or NYC if I could because I really like the feeling of being in a skyscraper canyon like Toronto's financial district.

[@spektriye]

Name was almost based until liberal (🤢) was put in

[@KRYMauL]

@@spektriye It says neoliberal, and honestly I think OP has a point.

[@shayan_idk]

based name

[@HYDRAdude]

@@KRYMauL That's even worse.

[@chiquita683]

@@spektriye car free isn't based, it's a slave. Your movement is highly limited just as the Great Reset wants. Enjoy your plantation and food rations

[@williamchamberlain2263]

Depends who designs it, with which parameters, and how it's constructed and with which standards. Lived in a couple, and the one converted from an office building was great because the elevators always worked, and the floors and walls were good and thick due to higher load standards.

[@1038bro]

good to know! my area has a lot of defunct office space and I want to write to the council to rezone and readapt it for housing. for some reason they keep developing more office space despite the fact that wfh and an oncoming recession is the status quo

[@KRYMauL]

They really do need to convert more office building especially with so many offices going fully remote.

[@GourmetBurrito]

Lucky. The last apartment tower I lived in, they said the elevator would be fixed in 2 weeks and it took them 8 months. I was a young guy so it was more annoying than anything for me, but for the seniors that lived in the building that's an absolute hazard

[@reddawn5454]

this could be said about literally any type of designed item

[@KRYMauL]

@@reddawn5454 What can, using traditional development styles and techniques?

[@jlpack62]

I live on a low floor in a high rise building with all the advantages stated in this video including a view because I look at a neighborhood park. I often use the stairs instead of the elevators. You pretty much nailed why I live where I live.

[@Preygrantess]

You two are the least snobby urbanists, thanks for the amazing content!

[@indignation01]

7:02 "I wish people were better at separating their housing preferences with housing policy. You don't want to want to live in a tall building yourself to believe that others should have the option." I wish that this applied to EVERYTHING, separating preferences with policy and allowing others to do things that you personally don't want.

[@KRYMauL]

There are many compromises like dingbat 2.0 in LA that can easily fit in nearly any residential neighbourhood, for instance: multiplex, walk-up apartments, townhouse complexes, attached homes, etc.

[@FGH9G]

Bingo. Way too many people mix up their own preferences with everyone else's preferences, and above all else, YOUR preference alone should never be law!

[@KRYMauL]

@@FGH9G I disagree, having a height maximum is fine for suburbs and small towns, but that doesn’t mean that there should be no way to build anything that adds density like multiplexes, attached houses, dingbat 2.0s, etc.

[@موسى_7]

People prefer houses like they prefer Mercedes. But nobody had banned making cheap cars, but zoning exists for housing.

[@KRYMauL]

@@موسى_7 Not quite, people prefer houses because they all think they can live in a nice White-picket fence home community with a nuclear family and Cadaillac out front. This is almost never what happens because to give everyone a Levittown home, you increasingly need to go further into rural areas. A good compromise is to allow multi-family, casitas, and tienditas in every neighbourhood.

[@Stefi747]

I always appreciate the balanced and fair arguments you two bring to your videos. It's quite refreshing

[@waisinglee1509]

As an older person and someone who is familiar with geriatric issues, I would look for a condo building that can be tall or not but without a pool. Most importantly it has to have a bank of elevators. I want a library, a hospital, two supermarkets or more, etc. close by. I know people who live in the suburbs or countryside but as one ages those locations are just not feasible. I knew someone who got angry when I asked what happens if you were shoveling your driveway in the wintertime, have a heart attack and the ambulance was an hour away? And, what will you do when the gov't takes away your driver's license?

[@موسى_7]

Everyone should see your comment. My grand uncle lives in a tower with his many children and grandchildren. In different apartments of course, but the family is all together in one tower. Their apartments are bigger than some houses in London, because they live in the Middle East.

[@Erintii]

I will also add POV of those who in a long term or permanently can't drive. They are prisoners of suburbs, unable to buy milk on their own. Those are: 1) people too young to drive 2) elderly people whose health is not good (thanks to the Third World access of healthcare in the US) 3) people who cannot afford a car 4) people with medical conditions that making it dangerous or impossible to drive, or taking drugs that impaired abilities to drive (e.g. antipsychotic drugs used in depression or bipolar disorder). Those people can be living decent lives in walkable, car independent places. Kids can take bus or train to visit friends or whatever but all are prisoners of suburbia.

[@KRYMauL]

@@موسى_7 I think it depends, for instance condo towers with actual 4 bedroom suites would provide decent space for nuclear families, but there are definitely cases for making lower density housing like dingbat 2.0s a more normal thing.

[@GreenJimll]

@@Erintii I'm epileptic so I've never learnt to drive but I walk everywhere. When I spent 3 months living with my brother and his family in rural Canada 30-odd years ago I was struck by how little I could walk to. The village store and... er... well that was about it. The village didn't even have a pub and there was no public transport (a bus did pass by on the main road a mile or so away but didn't stop). I tried to walk to the next town one day but misread the scale on the map and had to turn round after 3 or so hours of walking when I realised I was only about half way there. If I wanted to go to a town or the nearest city I had to wait for my brother or sister-in-law to drive there and drop me off/pick me up. Made me acutely aware of the scale difference in North America compared to the UK.

[@Erintii]

@@GreenJimll This is so sad, really horrible experience.

[@jfungsf882]

Great video! You folks continue to knock it out of the park when it comes to talking about why high rise housing is desirable. For me it's definitely my *MOST preferred* type of housing for the reasons you mention in addition to NOT having to maintain the entire building yourself. Your videos talking about high-rise super tall housing speaks to my preferences & strikes a chord that often gets left out of urbanist circles.

[@danielotoole9610]

I'm suprised to see no mention of energy saving. It cheaper to cool/heat an apartment than a detached single family home. Addtionally if someone lives in a transit oriented building then it's unlikely they'll have a car with emissions.

[@موسى_7]

Who cares about the environment? Not NIMBYs.

[@Recluse336]

It's funny, a number of years back I lived in a 10 or 12 floor, I forget now, and was on the 4th or 5th floor, towards the center of the building. In the 2 years I lived there, I never turned the heat or the AC on, and this was N. Virginia. I suppose I mooched off my neighbors, but being surrounded by other apartments, except on my 1 exterior wall kept my apartment temperate year round. And the walls between apartments seemed fairly well insulated, as I never heard any noise from my neighbors.

[@michaelimbesi2314]

@@Recluse336 Same! I also live in a high rise in NOVA and I can go four or five months a year without using either heat or AC, just by using the adjusting the blinds and opening or closing the window!

[@barvdw]

a little nuance, there, as many high-rises, especially in North America, are double-loaded, which means they don't offer the possibility of cross-ventilation. With increasing temperatures, that does seem like a necessity. The last heatwave, some apartments were just unbearably hot, and if the only alternative is air-conditioning, we might have a problem. But there are solutions to that problem, and banning high-rises isn't one of them, agreed.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@Recluse336 I do miss how I had to run the heating less when I had an apartment with only two exterior walls. Now I've got three, since I'm on the corner of the building, and it does make a big difference. OTOH I get good views in more directions so I don't mind too much I guess.

[@Alltoc]

Building more housing is the only way to make housing more affordable. More people need to realize this. If there is demand for high buildings then let them be build and if you don't want to live in one you don't have to. There are loads of people who would love to live in one.

[@KateeAngel]

Or stopping population growth

[@steemlenn8797]

No, not the only way. We could also go back to the sizes/head we had 100 years ago. But as long as a size where a whole family used to live is considered normal size for a single,. there will be not enough living space.

[@موسى_7]

@@KateeAngel Yes, they are pro-family but anti-procreation those NIMBYs. They say we need to start families, but they don't make housing avaliable to do so. I'm a family values Muslim guy but I'm urbanist. A fundamentalist American would call trains and buses Satanic, but in Khamenei's Tehran, there are 11,000 people per square kilometre and they walk and ride buses and trains.

[@roberthoople]

I've never thought apartments were bad, just that most of them waste their roof space and tend to be kind of ugly and hostile the way many of them are currently developed and concentrated in downtowns. I genuinely wish people would stop fighting against tall buildings, for all the reasons you've presented, and instead use that energy to fight developers for more attractive buildings with greener roofs, in more neighborhoods and that create more street level public space with their podiums.

[@VillainousHanacha]

I am personally of mixed feelings when it comes to high rises. I like the fact that high rises always have elevators (for moving large things) and always have doormen (so you don't have to wait around for packages or get things delivered to your job). I also think that low rise density makes a more aesthetically pleasing streetscape (particularly when paired with grand street trees). However I would also say that high rise towers (and their brother from another mother, 5 over 1's) are entirely nessesary in North America right now, regardless of my romantic sentiments. Because there is so little construction being done, there is so much pent up demand for housing that it is driving prices through the roof. To give a local example, here in South Brooklyn old interwar and just postwar housing easily goes for a million, and 2 bedroom rentals go for $1800 to $2000 regularly. This in a part of the city where unless you are going to certain parts of Manhattan, a bus to a train is usually a requirement, above ground powerlines are common (in a very flat part of Brooklyn that is close to the water) and the neighborhoods while not terrible, are definitely shabby and a bit run down (the only exception being to this being Bay Ridge, which as a result is even more expensive). We are so far behind in providing even market rate housing stock (forget about affordable or public housing) that these ultra dense developments are the shock therapy we need. Do I think we need to build more public housing? Sure. Do I think the out lying parts of metro areas need to pull their weight a bit more when it comes to providing housing (looking at you southern NY and Long Island)? Of course. That being said, we also just need to build more housing in general and we are very far behind. We need many more units of housing so that it can begin the long process of trickling down to the poorer parts of society. As it has been said on Stong Towns, today's affordable housing is yesterday's luxury housing. I remember reading a comment somewhere that in order to fix our housing crisis, San Francisco needs to look like NYC and NYC needs to look like Singapore. While I think that comment is a little reductive, the core message that we need to be more accepting of density (including high rise density) is entirely valid. Romantic attachments drive too much housing policy, and we need to be far more practical than we are. For the superstar cities ( Toronto, Vancouver, NYC, SF, etc) high rises and 5 over 1's are a very practical solution to a pressing problem.

[@fallenshallrise]

Shock therapy is a good word for it. Everyone involved has dug their heels in for so long that in a lot of cities it's way past the time for gentle measures like adding a few laneway homes or basement suites. Time to rip off the bandaid and say any land that isn't poisoned is open season for any mixed use and any level of density that the owner wants to build.

[@EnbyFranziskaNagel]

I live in the sixth floor in an Appartment without elevators. There is a reason why 90% of my furniture is from the previous tenant even though the appartement was technically sold unfurnished. The tenants (mainly students, the building is right next to Uni) engage in an furniture relay race. Take over the furniture when moving in and selling it to the next tenant after moving out. Carrying one room worth of stuff (clothing, Office supplies, dishes etc) 110 steps was arduous enough.

[@RsSooke]

I live in a wood frame 6 story apartment block in Victoria British Columbia and for all of its faults it is generally great. The only time noise has been an issue is people in the hallway, you really can’t hear much of your neighbours inside their actual units due to the party wall feature of the construction. We have amenities like a gym, movie theatre, games room and even children a playground (no pool though) but we’re members of the YMCA Rec centre just down the road. My daughter loves going. We’re less than a 1 km walk from her elementary school. We have a dog and while it’s a small pain to take her down 6 stories luckily there’s an elevator and we live on a bike/walking trail. I would live in an even taller building if necessary.

[@kaitlyn__L]

This is a very similar experience to my steel-framed 6-floor building. The only time I usually hear my neighbours on this floor is when their front door opens or closes and they use the lift. I've only heard music once or twice and it must've originally been extremely loud to have made it through. There's a few structural noises, like I hear when the bathroom above mine is using their shower, but I like those sounds so it's totally fine with me.

[@CheapCharlieChronicles]

Best when they are placed normally in city blocks next to other buildings and houses and not required to be surrounded by green space as is so often the case.

[@scottalbrecht3578]

My parents moved from their small-town single-detached house to a seniors-focused 12-storey condo building. They love being able to get together with other people (there is a quilting room!) without going outside. A condo instead of house means less maintenance as they age, too. My dad definitely enjoys the views, including seeing other condo buildings under construction in the downtown.

[@sterlinghartley2165]

High rises have their place, especially now where missing middle housing is illegal, but I feel after missing middle is legalised we could see floor preference change. If you've only lived in 1 story home and a 30 story apartment block then your view of where is good will be quite off if your thinking of a 10 story building. Making sure views of the city and nature are preserved seems like something worth doing but maybe in a way that these views are more accessible to all, if 3 residence get a great view but their tower blocks everyone else's view it seems quiet unfair compared to that building being placed where it doesn't block as many others' views. I think I saw someone else mention the looks of towers and I must agree, most of them are tall glass boxes with no distinctive look or architecture. I know for affordability not ever building can be a masterpiece but every building being the same bland box is an issue in itself. One that a bunch of 3+ floor buildings could solve by allowing for variation on a common design to make each building unique without be an eye sore.

[@موسى_7]

I don't think that blocking a view is a problem. The only reason a skyscraper would be built next to tiny houses is if the tiny houses reside on land which is underdeveloped and has great value for building and expanding the city.

[@nickanand8087]

Missing middle is awesome in MTL, but in Toronto it seems like a red herring used by NIMBYs to block the dense development we need along our limited transit corridors. Whereas in MTL, it works because it's a large portion of the city.

[@spektriye]

Tall glass boxes look cool

[@KRYMauL]

@@موسى_7 It’s more like, no one wants to live in another building’s shadow. I think Ocean’s 13 is about this.

[@KRYMauL]

@@nickanand8087 Middle Density can look like single-family detached homes because by definition they are plexes to townhouses/walk-up apartments.

[@bradencuttler4806]

I WANT to live in one of these but they simply don't exist where I live! The height limits in Washington, D.C. mean that buildings are at most 10-15 stories, plus the NIMBYism in the surrounding counties has vanquished tall buildings from one of the most in-demand real estate markets on the continent.

[@gcason2]

“I wish people were better at separating their housing preferences from their housing policy”. Truth.

[@fedrickrobert]

I live in a mid rise building in Japan. We have a gym, massive pool, hot springs, three gardens, sound proof recording studio, party room (more than 30 ppl) guest rooms for visitors, concierge, convenience store in the building. Moreover it’s a two minute walk to a mag lev/bus/subway terminal. Oh and I have like 3 supermarkets walkable from my apartment. Living densely rocks!

[@spikesmth]

Great video. I'd love to see more about highrises. I think there's a breakdown between perception and reality. Most people think of highrises in one of two extremes, ghetto projects and commie blocks, or luxury penthouses. And for sure, I think in most places the existing inventory might skew toward those extremes (for good and bad reasons). But I am curious what most detractors would think if they had to live in a middle-of-the-road, middle class tailored apartment block for 3 months. I bet a good chunk of suburbanite/carbrains would find a 5/1 more than adequate once they experienced the lifestyle. More of the missing middle housing would revitalize NA cities for the 21st century.

[@steemlenn8797]

A "commie block" is not a high-rise. A commie block is a building made for cheap, convenient housing. It does not have elevators, those are too expensive (and take away space.) The elevator thing is also why they generally are 4, 5 or 6 (often the legal limit) storey high. Of course there are similar buildings that are higher, but those are not meant by commie blocks. As your 5 over 1 are not meant if you say "high rises" too.

[@CheapCharlieChronicles]

When I think of highrises, I think of Hong Kong or Manhattan. Le Corbusier is to be blamed for the negative association with highrises as his utopian urban planning ideas led to failed housing projects.

[@mohammadkhan3230]

@@cmmartti I think the issue is that different types of buildings were built in different eras. A lot of people associate the term "commie block" with cheap, low-rise Khrushchyovkas whereas the later Brezhnevkas and Novostroikas were taller/bigger and had more modern amenities such as elevators.

[@cameronjournal]

@@CheapCharlieChronicles It had nothing to do with the design. The federal government stopped subsidizing them when the white folks moved out and the rents from the low-income tenants couldn't keep up with the expensive maintenance.

[@PlaystationMasterPS3]

5-over-ones are more midrise than highrise, since you can only go 7 stories before you're back to concrete

[@RoccosVideos]

As I get older I want to live less and less in the city but it’s nice to hear the positive points for doing so.

[@KateeAngel]

I would probably like to live in our summer house when I retire, after rebuilding it to be a warm house. But certainly not now. City offers too many advantages plus I have to work. I walk to my job on foot. I get sick in cars and buses

[@RoccosVideos]

@@KateeAngel To each their own. I just like having a yard. I like nature as well but of course a city has more to offer and sometimes with work you need to live in a city.

[@موسى_7]

@@RoccosVideos There's a man who said he wants to move to the city when he gets old because he's going to be too old to drive and he fears having a heart attack when doing yard work. But if you live with your children and grandchildren as people do traditionally except in England and America, then this is less of an issue. My grand uncle lives with children and grandchildren in a tower. Their apartments are bigger than houses in London, due to Middle East land being cheap.

[@grumpybulldog19]

My Italian great father used to say: when you move to the country you have two happiness moments: the first is when you move, the second is when you sell your land and move back to the city.

[@cooljonathan]

RE: noise. As you said earlier in the video, many more high rises are built next to highways than in established neighborhoods. I lived on the 5th floor of a building right on a major stroad in my city and I could never open my windows because of the constant car noise. I have since moved to a less dense area in a duplex and it is much quieter, but now I am more dependent on my car because there is less transit access in this area. It is annoying how people in high rises often experience the worst side effects of cars while also using cars significantly less. I wish my city would approve more developments on the interiors of neighborhoods rather than just on major arterials.

[@darrenparis8314]

I love that you included the survey results; that's the purpose of housing: meeting people's needs as well as their desires.

[@cyclost]

I lived in high-rise buildings during childhood and I think they are the worst, which the bad sides are not covered in the video. Living with very close neighbors means you need to put in a lot of trust on them. A noisy neighbor can ruin the experience for multiple other tenants, and no, concrete won't help especially for instruments. They can make 'just enough" noise that can make others annoying, but also below the threshold on the rules. Common areas can be ruined by just one person. Elevators can be great but it's going to be a hassle when power is out. It's also much harder to evacuate from a high-rise building in case of emergencies. Monthly costs are much more than single family homes due to shared amenities, security guards, or even parking.

[@calvenknox8552]

They never want to talk about the real downsides. Talking about them means admitting that new ideas are needed, and new ideas are hard.

[@mathewferstl7042]

​@@calvenknox8552sound proofing isn't an unknown technology. And can be put into housing regulation for mid to high rises for example

[@v.k.8153]

I’m from the suburbs outside of Phoenix, Arizona: a metro area that is exceptionally flat, with only a few high-rises in small districts in Phoenix and Tempe. I’ve never lived in a high-rise before, since they’re literally all luxury developments and there are, like, ten of them, but I’ve wanted to since I was a child. (Ideally on one of those upper-middle floors that are apparently the least popular.) I have literally never, not *once* told someone this and have them NOT give me a look like I was insane.☹️

[@n.b.3521]

I live in a high rise in Toronto and love it. We have a pool and gym, and live close to several grocery stores and a plethora of restaurants and parks. We're also close to a subway so can get anywhere quickly. I grew up in a car-oriented suburb and felt so trapped. I feel much freer now despite having no car.

[@bloodydoll5897]

tall density like this is probably my favourite housing, or at least one of my favourite types. i really like how calmly you communicate you points in these videos

[@neckenwiler]

Arguing against tall residential buildings because you, personally, don’t want to live in one is like arguing against crab cakes because you, personally, think they’re disgusting. No one is saying you HAVE to live in a tall building! We’re just saying you shouldn’t make it illegal for everyone else!

[@موسى_7]

No, it's worse than crab cakes. It's saying "Nobody should be working class or poor because everyone should be rich and drink tea while workers work on their farms". If everyone drinks tea, who is working the farm? If everyone is rich, nobody can be.

[@JimmiG84]

A lot of mid/high-rises are actually made of lightweight concrete (AAC) which is terrible for noise isolation. I lived on the 8th floor of a block built in the 1970's for nearly 10 years, and the poor noise isolation especially vertically was a huge issue as you could practically listen in on conversations in the apartment below. However the views were great, overlooking a nice park, and the privacy and being able to leave windows open without worrying about someone breaking in was nice. I now live on the ground floor of a low-rise apartment building with its own little backyard. This is also built with concrete, but the walls and floors are thicker and denser due to fewer weight constraints. Easy street access is a plus, but you definitely feel less secure. We always draw all the curtains and close the blinds at night because otherwise it feels like you're living in a display window.

[@lol-uu9fx]

i think that especially here in the uk high rise apartments from the 60s and 70s have left a bad taste in our mouths. they were not built with longevity in mind and turned into absolute shitholes. high rise housing is a great thing but only when done right with things like green space and community places as high rises can leave many people feeling isolated like what happened with the high rises in the uk.

[@ricequackers]

Another big issue in the UK (or at least, England) is leasehold. For an owner-occupier, I consider it a complete non-starter since you're forking out money for the apartment but you're still paying ground rent to the freeholder like some kind of feudal serf. You have no control over the ground rent and worse you have no control over the significantly higher service charges. The freeholder could whack up the service charge to the point that you literally can't afford to live in your own home. This is a non-issue if you own a freehold house where you're in control of maintenance and utilities. The other issue in the UK is that most apartments are frankly unsuitable for families. There's plenty of 1 bed and 2 bed apartments that are great for yuppies, but the moment you have kids the apartment will become very cramped. 3+ beds do exist but are either very rare or are luxury apartments that cost high six or low seven figures. Oh and because public transport is inadequate outside of London you'll still need a car anyway, but parking space for cars is either very limited or non-existent. If you have a visitor arriving by car, good luck to them in finding somewhere to park if the complex doesn't have guest parking spaces. It's no wonder then that unlike continental Europe the vast majority of people prefer houses to apartments, especially if buying rather than renting.

[@موسى_7]

@@ricequackers In Tehran, the apartments are bigger than London houses, because in Muslim countries, everyone has families, and in Iran, people like living with grandchildren.

[@vylbird8014]

Also doesn't help that the 70s apartments were expressly intended to provide homes for the very lowest income classes. Not a bad thing in itsself, because people do need housing they can afford, but it was really just creating a vertical ghetto: Stuff all the poors in one place so civilised people don't have to look at them. Then let the buildings fall to ruin, because people in borderline poverty can't afford to maintain things.

[@PlaystationMasterPS3]

@@موسى_7 I've been saying for a while that we need more apartment buildings with more bedrooms.. what's the urban planning in tehran like?

[@mrsnulch]

Great video! I think a point you missed is that many critics dislike these high-rises for reasons not mentioned here, mainly: 1. They are considered too expensive for the average person with a 40-50k salary and don’t help combat the housing crisis we are seeing 2. A new condo going up can often obstruct the view of existing residents I personally am in favor of high rises, but those are just some arguments I’ve heard.

[@benjones1717]

People dislike tower blocks because they were are still are often used to for social housing - so they assume the building was the reason the local area was so blighted - but when they aren't social housing they are perfectly reasonable, you are just trading location for size.

[@anonuser12345]

I love skyscrapers (residential or commercial). The taller the better in my opinion. Put a handful of local restaurants at the base of them and you have the best building I can imagine.

[@malcolm_in_the_middle]

One of the issues I have with tall buildings and apartment blocks in general is the existence of 'semi-private' space, where you have to interact with your neighbours, but not the public in general. It makes it vital to have good neighbours, as not being able to avoid a bad neighbour can be very detrimental to your mental health. In a terrace, or low rise, your bad neighbour's behaviour is somewhat kerbed by having fully public access, but if access to your home is shielded from the general public, either by being in an apartment block, or by being in an alley, it leaves you more at risk of becoming a victim of crime. I would love to see this point addressed, both to quantify the problem (or maybe it's just my perception?) and to explore solutions. I do feel that this is a fairly common concern, and also why many apartment buildings become crime hotspots.

[@lazulelle]

I live in a high-rise tower in the Philippines and I live next to a mall. The convenience is fantastic. Having a reception area is also a huge plus for me. I don't have to be home or even awake to receive packages.

[@dylanalvarezdylan]

I live in a city where building height regulation is pretty lax (Buenos Aires, Argentina) and in here I see that it ends up being about avoiding others casting shadow on your house, or building windows right in front of yours, so things like privacy or sunlight end up being privileges of the upper classes that can afford higher floors. I think that when allowing high rises it's important to regulate bigger spaces between buildings because otherwise most apartments (especially older buildings) are going to be stripped from their share of sunlight

[@ryuuguu01]

If that space between buildings can be made into green space or plazas ( with some green) it really improves the neighbourhood.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@ryuuguu01 a lot of Soviet planning did this. They'd have a subway station in the centre, amenities around the outside, and plenty of sunlight space between each apartment tower. Then, post-liberalisation, a lot of the "wasted" land between towers was bought-up and new apartments were built right-between the old ones. So now everyone's view is of each other's homes, they have no sunlight, and the courtyards to the subway feel dead and grey rather than sunny and airy. :/

[@chicagocarless]

Mail/package rooms. That's another common high-rise amenity, which for us has been a life-saver for the past 2 1/2 (pandemic) years. Not having to fear your grocery or Amazon delivery walking away with someone else affords a lot of peace of mind. We live on the 20th floor of a midcentury high-rise on the far north side Chicago lakefront. This city is a lot like Toronto in terms of very many people living in (and experiencing community in) high-rises, and very many other people complaining about them. I used to live in Brownstone Brooklyn, and also in low-rise Chicago housing. I do sometimes miss trotting down a couple of flights of stairs and out the front door into the middle of a brownstone/low-rise urban neighborhood. But I love the fact that--even in the outer neighborhood where we live--a high-rise can give us so much. Elevator access (we're both late middle-aged), horizon-wide city and lake views, safe deliveries, lobby security, a maintenance staff, indoor parking, bus and rail transit being thisclose--and we can still walk to neighborhood shops and groceries if we want to. The problem here (and I'm sure in TO) is new-construction high rises are ridiculously expensive to rent in or buy into. I think a lot of the grousing about them comes from that. But older high-rise stock is usually more (sometimes much more) affordable--and has the benefit, due to time, of already being organically plugged into neighborhoods and having developed internal community. We'll probably always live in high-rises at this point, but I'm not sure we'd be happy in a newly built one.

[@Bianca_Toeps]

I love living in high-rise buildings. The one where I used to live in Rotterdam had a supermarket, doctor, dentist, gym, two restaurants and mail deposit box on the ground floor. The views were awesome too. (I live on Tokyo now, and from my 10th floor apartment I can just see the tip of Mt. Fuji... But other high-rise buildings are blocking the view for most other people...)

[@michaelimbesi2314]

THANK YOU!!!! I live in a high rise and I absolutely love it. I love having a million dollar view from our club room. I love swimming in the rooftop pool and feeling like I’m floating in the sky. I love not needing to use stairs. I love having a doorman so my packages are always kept safe and never ever stolen.

[@b9904]

I actually live in a high rise in the middle of a walkable district with good access to public transportation, schools, and hospitals. Big parks are further away but our common area has a pool, a playground, and a gym. Our unit is almost the penthouse

[@PaigeMTL]

We should do this topic at Canadian Civil this year. People who advocate densification writing off high density is such a weird phenomenon. Most of their issues seem to be a few legislative changes away like greenspace, parking maximums, energy efficiency standards. But instead of proposing those changes they write off the form of dense transit oriented housing that is actually being built.

[@andresaliba]

I think most people are against high-rises because they are not necessary. If zoning was reformed and the missing middle introduced, high-rises don't really need to exist. They make the street worse to be in, and blocks the sky. The sense of community with the missing middle is much bigger than high-rises, regardless if they are residential. It's more pleasurable to walk or bike on a mid-rise street than one with high-rises.

[@OhTheUrbanity]

@@andresaliba The issue is that zoning reform is actually pretty difficult. Toronto barely legalized garden suites, the absolute most gentle of density. We'll keep advocating for medium-density (3-to-6-storeys) to be legalized everywhere but until that happens, high-rise towers are the best way to use the small amount of space where development is legal. (And it's also important to add that missing middle reform would really only decrease need for towers, not eliminate it.)

[@andresaliba]

@@OhTheUrbanity While I agree they are a "necessary evil", it's hard to move on from it after they are built. With medium-density, it's easier to then rebuild into a high-density apartment. But building high-density right away, makes the entire area "hostage" to that design now, much harder to rebuild. It's a tough issue and I understand both sides, but coming from a city where high-rises literally dominate the entire city (São Paulo), I can't help but be biased against their proliferation.

[@PaigeMTL]

I increasingly thinking there is too much group think around medium density, it’s so popular in that way that makes me think that in 2050 some young person will be starting their equivalent version of a KZbin video with “The most prevalent idea in city hall was medium density but it turned out…” Because the history of planning is an endless cycle of over application of a particular solution or theory. Variety is the thing that seems to age best.

[@andresaliba]

@@PaigeMTL The great cities in the world to visit and walk around today are incredibly old ancient mid-rise cities, save a few. Take the old towns in England, Ireland, Venice, Rome, Amsterdam, etc... Those are all amazing to be in and would be amazing to live in as well. Compare that to other great cities like Tokyo, NYC, Hong Kong, and where would you rather walk and cycle? Those are all world class cities but the sheer size of the buildings around you do influence the way you live. I agree that variety is the answer, but starting from high-rises makes it seem like it's the best and only solution, which leads to other high-rises being built around it.

[@rachidparchment7907]

These are really good points and I agree fully about the peace of mind of not having to worry about things being stolen from your balcony when you're higher up. However, what happened at Grenfell Towers in London makes me scared to live too high up though.

[@xavierjunod5967]

I moved from an tower appartement to a appartement in a detached house in a residential area and I was surprised how much louder it is in a house. Backyard parties, landmowers, dogs barking, etc. I can hear anything happening on my block. If you have a couple loud neighbors on the same street it must be hell. I the tower I almost never heard neighbors trough walls

[@tarttooth6022]

In my city a handful of developers are buying up historic poor areas, knocking down old buildings and replacing them with generic apartment buildings that cost more than people in these areas can even afford. A lot of the units remain vacant. I'm all for tall apartment buildings but they need to exist with the intent of addressing actual housing needs, not just exist as an investment.

[@zakywave]

I agree with a lot of your points, as I find myself in a bit of a dilemma looking for housing at the moment. Another con I would say about living in a high rise condo (more of an issue in newly developed buildings) is the possibility of leaks and pipe bursts. From my time working as a concierge, I found it to be a bit too common. Whether it was neglect by the neighbour above ( left for work with the tap running..) or mismanagement by management (neglecting maintenance to pipes during seasonal changes despite multiple reports of signs of wear and tear), I’ve come to dread high density living due to the unknown factors beyond just a buildings’ size and how a little water can do a lot of damage.

[@isabexiefromthehall]

The long-term maintenance of high rises are a huge problem. The higher you go, the worst it gets.

[@cerebraldreams4738]

I own a car, and when I started to think about what it would take to retain my standard of living, my access to amenities, and my ability to connect with other people, without that car, the only actual answer to any of that is high density residential construction. Without that, not owning a car is tantamount to social death. I'd like to live in a society where car ownership isn't necessary. Cars should be a luxury, not a necessity.

[@UniquelyUnseen]

Highrise towers that are able to be built near amenities are wonderful, and should be encouraged. The point you mke about the elevator was really useful and good to point out.

[@UpstreamNL]

What bother me most is simply the cost and the fact that these buildings are constructed as luxery appartments. Where I live, a two-bedroom app in one a high-rise can easily be 600k and three or four-bedroom app can go up to 1M or even 1.5M. Whenever I see new high-rise construction, my first thought is always “great, more super luxerous life space for the 1% that can afford it.

[@mr.vash42]

Not sure if this will make you feel any better but this tends to be the trend with most new housing. The way we get more affordable housing is to have built high end housing 20+ years ago. Housing that's old and hasn't been updated to newer features and styles tends to be the cheaper housing today. I'm pretty sure they mentioned this in a previous video, but it could have been someone else, and I've not independently looked at trends to verify this is true myself.

[@machtmann2881]

New housing is more expensive period. I see what you mean but the alternative is for older, smaller housing to rise to 1-1.5M and for wealthier residents to push out older, established ones. The rich can have their 1M condo so long as they don't push me out of my current housing lol

[@johnforestersworstnightmar3756]

The biggest issue with high rise residential towers is efficiency rather than livability. After the 10th floor, every additional floor makes the structure less efficient, both utilities and space wise. This includes more space needed for utility rooms and elevators (super tall towers sometimes need entire floors for counterweights to keep the building from toppling over, see the latest NYC pencil towers), less thermal insulation, and less utility efficiency. While I’d rather have more Condo towers than detached-single family housing being built in cities, blocks of attached mid-rise buildings found in like Barcelona or tenement blocks in NYC would probably be the best. (Though I also have a lot issues with the modern 5 over 1s being built rn too)

[@E1Luch]

A 20-30 storey building doesn't need more than 2 elevators per stairway and no complicated mass dampers which are usually required only in supertall towers of like 80 floors. Thermal insulation is only bad if the whole outer wall is just a glass panel, but theres no reason we have to build like that, because even from an aesthetic pov you can just slap a glass panel on top of normal solid wall. Utility efficiency wise, it only takes 0.25kwh to pump a cubic meter (1000 liters) of water up 30 storeys (90m). Its a really small amount. You can burn this much just gaming for an hour on a lot of modern rigs. I consume around 10 m3 of water and 180 kwh of electricity per month. Pumping it up 30th floor would increase my electricity bill by like 2%. And unlike sewage water, elevator coming down can easily recuperate energy that it spent moving up, so they can be pretty efficient too.

[@DangRenBo]

I have lived in four countries in East Asia. In three of them, high-rise communities are popular. These have great advantages. Multiple buildings are interspersed with amenities, and there are generally shops and restaurants at the bottom floor of the buildings. The communities are gated and safe. There is almost always great public transportation within steps of these communities. Population density is very high in East Asia, but there are definitely advantages.

[@emh.1178]

I live in the middle and love the hot tub and never having to worry about someone breaking in through my open windows. Plus I live in a very hot climate and I never turn on the AC. I have some fans going and the windows cracked for airflow, but I'm very comfortable even on days that get over 110

[@Awesomeguy614]

The problem with tall buildings is that as you build higher it takes more and more energy to provide proper services so after a certain point there's a large energy and logistics demand that's not worth it. And in many cases when you build up high enough it means increasing the size of the foundation which can end up taking a lot of space such that multiple shorter units could fit on the same plot and provide more housing. In essence, similar problems to suburbs in that they're not optimal land use and by their nature make services expensive. In fairness, you can build pretty high before getting there. Something like ten stories is still well before that point of diminishing returns I think. On the issue of safety, as you said it depends on having the right kind of staff like elevator attendants, doormen, and front desk staff. The quintessential failed public housing project is constructed similarly to an apartment complex that would have such amenities but without them. This turns parts of the building like parking lots and stairwells into liminal spaces that are socially remote and its here that petty criminals flourish. That wreaks havoc on people's sense of safety, especially vulnerable people like the elderly and children and this leads them to withdraw and cedes the liminal spaces further.

[@E1Luch]

Crime is a product of poverty. If you build appartmet blocks for the poorest of the poor only, and then dont even maintain it properly or provide these people with opportunities, you just create a vertical ghetto. A cubic meter of water at 90 meter height (roughly 30 storeys up) has potential energy of just 0.25kwh. Some pumps have efficiencies of more than 90%. Its almost nothing unless you literally drain rivers down your sink.

[@johnroutledge9220]

As a side note, tower blocks are inherently good at retaining heat and/or rejecting it. Since in theory individual flats are surrounded on up to 5 sides by other flats or hallways at a similar temperature, and the outer walls can be (and sometimes need to be) much thicker than on many conventional houses. Centralised hotwater/heating, and cooling can also add to their thermal efficiency.

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

I lived on the 29th floor once and it wasn't as quite as you would think. Sound travels up very easily. And the time spent waiting for elevators was a problem. But I still agree with you on this. I would prefer to live in the bottom 5 stories myself, but I would go higher if it was the only way to get morning sun in the winter.

[@Basta11]

Growing up in Asia, high rises were associated with wealth like ivory towers. This is because they are usually in the most valuable land, walking distance to shopping malls, business districts, parks, transit stations, among other things. You don't have to drive in traffic everyday or even take public transit.

[@wojogo]

In Chicago, older folks have the option to live together in an older high-rise used as a senior living community. I think this is a very desirable option. They get access to the urban environment, multiple hospitals within 2 miles, specialists a short bus ride away, and amenities like a pool/gym as you outlined. It doesn't pencil out as a use for new towers usually, but to have older towers in 50 years we need the new towers now.

[@ThomasDeFranco]

Your videos are so important. Thank you!

[@ericherrero3212]

A yard for my dog and kids is great to have..but damn a shorter commute in exchange for an elevator ride is an easy trade. More housing supply plz!

[@MassiveChetBakerFan]

Great video! Love the channel’s name!

[@SteelersFans99]

Views: They are valued both by people living in apartment buildings and people who live beside tall apartment buildings. If a large building goes up next to your house, or smaller apartment, your view of the sky, sun and area is blocked. While the views for people who can afford the higher rent prices of higher floors get an excellent unobstructed view, until a taller building blocks it. It is not fair to take away the views from one group to sell them to another. There needs to be a balance. Part of the reason it is so nice to walk around in Montreal is because there are far fewer tall towers in the city (+mixed used middle density), which block out the sun for people walking below and pose a risk for falling ice and glass! Downtown Toronto is a wall of towers in all directions. Most condos primarily have views of other condos, unless they are on the higher floors. I have been almost hit by falling ice from the Shard, it is not a fun experience. Not to mention risks posed by people like Chair Girl. Apartment buildings and towers are excellent for increasing density. They are needed for our cities. But there needs to be a diversity in tower designs so streets aren't covered by a wall of rectangular towers blocking the sun, posing risks from ice + falling objects, creating wind vortexes, and looking the same as all the other blue/green glass rectangular towers.

[@Preetzole]

Imo, extremely populated downtowns are the only place where tall buildings (about 7 or more floors) should be allowed. On the outskirts of cities and smaller towns, 3-6 floors is a good enough height since they aren't excessively tall, but hold a decent amount of people. Single family homes should still probably be separated, but it would also be good to downsize them in size and quantity to reduce sprawl.

[@cinn48]

I need a tshirt which reads "You don't have to want to live in a tall building yourself to believe that other people should have the option." 🙌

[@MTobias]

There is an easy fix to this: Just make them beautiful. Compare the Art Deco condos of NYC to modern towers and it's easy to see why so many people dislike them. If we rediscover how to build beautifully, maybe the reaction to a new building going up won't be "damn those monstrosities" but "oh I wonder how that will look like when finished".

[@bryansmith1920]

@ 3:32 you stated living higher up is good for safety We in Britain know of the Grenfell Tower disaster where a tower block (as we term them) was under renovation It's outer cladding caught fire and went up in flames like a Roman candle killing 72 on 24 floors It seems lowest bidder has some role to play in this I myself a 68yr old Brit live in a one up one down house with 1 entrance and 3 windows I have had heart surgery Do I sleep with my door unlocked because it saved my life last time

[@solderbuff]

02:06 - heh! We just passed this building with my wife two hour ago and were both wondering why does it look so cozy.

[@jiffyb333]

I hadn't realized I had started to fall into this snobbery. Thank you for catching me, these are great points!

[@davidritchie1272]

(from Chicago Uptown) my 7th floor height is perfect because my view is vast (including a tiny slice of Lake Michigan) but I'm close enough to the sidewalks below to be able to recognize a friend. This is an intentional community as well (look it up if that doesn't signify) so the residents on my floor are all friends; this more than all else put together got me psychologically through covid - my in-house family of 35.

[@nitnatclo-oose297]

I was dismayed when - 10 years ago - the only affordable apartment I could find was in a high rise. Now I have come to realize it’s advantages. The view is spectacular. Private and peaceful. Right by the subway. I don’t have to worry about maintenance or anything. I ditched the car. If I need one I have many car share options downstairs. The one thing I miss is having a yard where I can have a fire and a smoky barbecue.

[@kevinmiller8111]

My hometown for example is densifying mainly by building missing middle housing (townhomes, small apartments 2-3 stories) but almost all of them are owned by a handful of corporate developers who charge a lot more for a 1 bd than what most would pay for a starter SFH (2-3Bd/1-1.5ba) in the area. Many are also not located in highly walkable areas so all residents are practically forced to own a car if they want to go anywhere. The companies can easily increase rent since there is practically no competition when you have 2-3 companies owning all new developments. Would love to see a video tackling affordability of denser living arrangements.

[@bentoney9682]

My favorite living area was dorm rooms in college because of the ability to meet people in the common areas on each floor that would have tv couch and tables

[@RoccosVideos]

To each their own. In my dorms we were packed in like sardines.

[@KateeAngel]

As an extreme introvert, I shiver when I remember living in dorms. And I lived in them for almost 12 years. And just moved out to a rented flat a week ago. I am 28 years old. Thankfully at least in my last dorm it was super quiet and my roommate didn't even talk at all

[@KateeAngel]

@@RoccosVideos yeah I don't know how it's elsewhere but in my uni in Russia all dorms have rooms for 2-3 people. Many dorms in smaller universities house 5-6 people in one room. Not having my own room was a pain and exacerbated my depression when I was 16-20 years old when I still haven't been diagnosed properly

[@steemlenn8797]

@@KateeAngel Living with someone else is a horror for me too. But I could see people like us liking a common room (with some niches) for games and talk and the monthly together-meal. You, just the thing you stroll over to to have 2 hours of fun with other people if you feel like it once a week or so and then sounter off back into your cozy home.

[@RoccosVideos]

@@KateeAngel I’m introverted as well. I also have anxiety. My anxiety is better than it used to be but it was bad in college especially when I couldn’t away from people. I was so much happier living off campus, more space and privacy. In the US dorm rooms are always crowded unless you’re an RA.

[@theultimatereductionist7592]

This is why I love love LOVE the single-floor rancher house inside of a retirement community I live in with ZERO stairs: roll a wheelchair RIGHT in from ground level driveway. Also my father paid extra to install a concrete ramp from the ground level up to the back porch. A rise of maybe 4 inches, but still necessary to roll a wheelchair in. He did this for my disabled mother. Even our awesome previous suburban house, a single family home, built in 1959, had a step up from the garage and several steps in from the front door. My current house DOES have about 4 inch step up from the garage into the house if you go through the door between the garage and house.

[@sangle120]

I've never come across high rises with guest suites but it strikes me as a very efficient use of space vs having a guest bedroom in each home!

[@EnbyFranziskaNagel]

I am used to guests sleeping on a mattress in the living room or in one of the bedrooms. Guest bedrooms for me are former child bedrooms that havent found a better use yet. A guest Suite could be a good Idea. But I think if my guests can't sleep in my appartement I would sent them to a local youth Hostel or hotel. They can

[@EnbyFranziskaNagel]

They can likely provide cheaper accomodation because of economies of scale.

[@sangle120]

@@EnbyFranziskaNagel I am in Australia and it seems very normal here to have a guest bedroom. There's even some new houses that go to the lengths of having a bedroom in their guest bedroom. To me it seems pretty wasteful, though we technically do have a spare bedroom at the moment while the kids are young and sharing a bedroom.

[@موسى_7]

@@EnbyFranziskaNagel I am used to sleeping on the floor and giving the guest my bed. Iraqis do that

[@MrBirdnose]

I lived in an apartment complex that had a couple guest suites. When not rented out to short-term guests they doubled as show units for people thinking of moving in to inspect.

[@jsrodman]

The problems with towers arent that they're taller or a blight. Theyre that they fundamental costs in energy and pollution are simply vastly higher for high rises. This has far more to do with building physics than with their nasic urbanity profile. Low rises typically don't suffer from these problems.

[@kevinlove4356]

I live in Toronto. The #1overriding priority is dealing with the housing crisis. Even people who are not homeless have their lives destroyed by skyrocketing rents that suck everything else out of their budget. This fully explains why our national birth rate equals national suicide. If we are going to have a future for our lives and our country we have to build a lot of housing very fast. And the only way of building a lot of housing fast is tall buildings. I certainly did not vote for Ford's PC government. But one thing that I do strongly support is his use of ministerial orders to override the selfish NIMBYs who are destroying our lives and destroying our future by opposing tall buildings.

[@kmann100500]

Or you could stop importing more people.

[@elciervoparaguayo3756]

Since i was a small child i wanted to live in a tall building, i like the views and as you mentioned taller buildings are safer which is a high priority when you live in a country like mine, my mother is quite the opposite, she prioritizes a big yard with a large garden (only remotely affordable in the countryside) I never tried to change her mind, and she never tried to change mine either. Everyone is different and in an ideal world everyone would have the option

[@philpaine3068]

Some tall towers within a neighbourhood that also offers a variety of mid-size and walk-up apartments, duplexes and single family homes with a good supply of trees and parks, walkable stores and other amenities seems to me to be the ideal. I've experienced it, living in both an old brick walk-up and a tall tower with balconies. In the tower, the view was spectacular, and the green neighbourhood bellow me was a refreshing sight every morning. Waiting a minute for an elevator in no way separated me from the street life of the neighbourhood, which I used and enjoyed to its fullest. I also knew that the towers provided the dense population and healthy tax base that made most of the neighbourhood's amenities possible. Neighbourhoods without them could not support, as mine does, a shop specializing in repairing violins, another selling old vinyl records, and another where I can get fresh Ethiopian njeera every morning. It's not surprising that my building houses several musicians, Ethiopians, and one Ethiopian who is a musician. Living in one of the suburban tower complexes is another matter entirely. A grey tower surrounded by other grey towers with nothing but parking lots below is my idea of hell --- but tower life in a real urban neighbourhood is idyllic. The walk-up I now live in is fine, and I can just step out onto the street and walk ten metres to a cafe, but I do miss the balcony and view the tower gave me. I'm glad that Oh, the Urbanity understands this.

[@TheShortStory]

Glad to see this perspective on tall buildings! I'm in Hong Kong and have stayed in everything from five-floor walkups to 40+-floor towers, and the factors mentioned in your video really resonate with me. The views, reduction of street noise (the higher you are), amenities and usually excellent access to public transit hubs is a real quality-of-life booster which to me adequately makes up for the lack of a balcony or lawn. In addition, I want to mention better airflow than ground level, reducing the need for cooling in summer-though it almost certainly raises our heating costs in winter. (Also reducing cooling costs is not having the roof directly above you) Hong Kong's transit-oriented development is truly excellent, though the artificially inflated property prices and relatively small apartments do take a toll on liveability. It's by no means perfect. But I think there are lessons to be learned for other cities.

[@shanekeenaNYC]

I would also qualify that by bringing up the unique geographical constraints in Hong Kong, and how they have managed to squeeze massive, 40-story towers on the sides of mountains much steeper than the Hollywood Hills. A few areas in the United States and Canada could learn something from Hong Kong's impressive hillside engineering of massive skyscrapers.

[@TheShortStory]

@@shanekeenaNYC Absolutely! Though I'd say it helps that many of the hills are sturdy granite rock which I understand helps a lot when you're doing foundation work for tall and heavy structures

[@shanekeenaNYC]

@@TheShortStory We still need to try it though. I am sure we have plenty of areas with sturdy enough rock to handle that kind of density. You just need to make the financial decision worth it.

[@Jillaroo79]

No they are not. I grew up in a 10 storey building in a hole, when I was 11 we moved to a townhouse with a garden. I can tell you there's absolutely no comparison between the two. Our quality of life skyrocketed since we moved out of the towerblock. I would only live in one if it was between that or homelessness.

[@dustinm2717]

And that's just your preference, there's nothing wrong with your preference but it's just that a preference like for me after having lived in a 1 floor detached house for so long i would honestly prefer to just live in an apartment a few floors up at this point, but I'm not gonna try say my ideas are for everybody either (i think something everybody needs to remember is that we are not everybody, our preference isn't universal and we should have the options for everyone)

[@EnbyFranziskaNagel]

My criteria for choosing Appartments are 1. Location, 2. Price 3. Size 4. Everything else. I want a affordable appartement in or near the City center. As I am a single Person household with no plans for expansion I need little space. I think my current 36 m^2 1 bedroom appartement is the optimum but I would gladly go back to a 20 m^2 dorm room with a mini kitchen and 3 m^2 bathroom if it meant I could live in a more central location.

[@ausbare140]

I love having high rise building near me they can all look into my yard and see what we are doing. We now have no privacy I feel so much better about that.

[@mathewferstl7042]

NIMBY

[@tarar.581]

One key counterpoint about the idea of "isolation": The very density of high rises can make them an extraordinarily EASY place to meet people, if you're so inclined. I live in a smaller high rise with a courtyard, gym, and a lounge room with seating/fireplace/wet bar. The building has an annual Christmas party. One of the more outgoing couples organized a game night that's open to everybody, and held each week in the lounge room. I run into the same people every time I go to the gym, and similarly, it's hard to go down to the courtyard without running into somebody and having a quick conversation. You see the same people over and over again in the elevators. Frankly, it's a far more social environment than the classic "Leave it to Beaver" suburban neighborhood I moved from, if only because the density makes it impossible not to see your neighbors. The caveat, of course, being that this version of socializing is VERY similar to the suburbs, in that there isn't always a ton of diversity. Most buildings skew towards a pretty specific demographic based on price/neighborhood/unit layout/amenities, and since the Christmas parties and game nights do nothing to help a person mix with the broader surrounding area, you're mixing with a pretty homogenous group...more so than you would be if you lived in one of the walkups a few blocks down, where it's a mix of renters and condo owners who purchased their units at vastly different price points depending on when they moved to the neighborhood. Still, for sheer ease of meeting people, high rises can be quite conducive to socializing.

[@TheMaxx111]

If you do not like the look of big buildings, why would you live in a big city?

[@Zedprice]

The problem with your survey, as anyone who does academic research can tell you, is that the enormous difference between stated preferences and revealed preferences. Applying your same methodology, North Americans almost universally say they "prefer" car dependent suburbia.

[@matthewluck9077]

My main issue with towers is the fact that they require a significant amount of additional energy per unit. That makes them less sustainable-not only environmentally but economically as well. So while I do see that maybe they could be a necessity is the centers of huge metropolitan centers, I generally see them an needless energy-suckers.

[@grumpybulldog19]

Why? I think the opposite, apartments are usually smaller than a single family house, they are more close of each other, so less lost energy, they can attract more public transportation, so you have to drive less...

[@matthewluck9077]

@@grumpybulldog19 The higher you build, the more material is required to support the nuilding, the more air is needed to be controlled throug the building, the more water mechanics is required to support the building, etc. And these numbers aren't just stacked increases-they're exponential increases. A fifty-storey building costs significantly more per floor than a five-storey building. When compared to a singal-family home in a rural area, that is tough to say. Single-family suburbs are massive drains to the environment and the economy. I'm more talking about the urban context.

[@grumpybulldog19]

@@matthewluck9077 makes sense, but for my experience in Brazil the tallests residencial buildings are 20 or 25 stores high, maybe it's better than 50.

[@matthewluck9077]

@@grumpybulldog19 i think the limit where the energy consumption significantly increases is only about 6 storeys. i’d say it depends on the need, but most cities don’t need buildings this fall. paris is a mega city and most of its buildings don’t exceed six storeys

[@fallenshallrise]

People in the city who got there first and grabbed the existing housing have spent years blocking the development of new mid-rise housing scattered throughout every neighborhood. All those missing apartments are then consolidated in clusters of huge towers which they also go to meetings and complain about. If every block in every neighborhood had 1 3-4 story walk-up with a retail spot on the ground floor and 10-12 apartments the population would be more evenly spread out through the city. With cafes, groceries and other shops on every block you wouldn't have to consolidate every store in the city into ugly strip malls. If that woman had her way the "city" would be her one house in a 100 acre field with a fence and a long driveway so she could drive to her favourite salon, whole foods, clothing boutique, jewelry store, restaurant and pharmacy that would somehow still be in business with no other customers and have staff working at them to serve her with no accommodation for them, and of course same day Amazon shipping even though she's the only customer. How do these people think that cities work? Density drives all of the convenience we come to enjoy. Same day shipping, food delivery, car services, cafes on every corner, hundreds of restaurants, schools, parks, fast internet, jobs, friends. In every city the densely populated areas generate all the profit for businesses and services and most of the tax base while "the burbs" reap all the rewards and then complain about it.

[@TheReaderOnTheWall]

All true and good points. I though however that you'd dive into the infrastructure costs (or lack thereof compared to suburbia). Suburbia has tons of concrete layed out for roads, cables for electricity, pipes for water, everyone with a car, trash collection for each homes, etc., compared to a much smaller use of these resources for high rises.

[@ttopero]

Do you mean comparing the high privatized maintenance costs of towers vs the high public maintenance costs of supporting the burbs?

[@TheReaderOnTheWall]

@@ttopero Yes, but it's true I was not clear. I meant that suburbia has tons of concrete layed out for roads, cables for electricity, pipes for water, everyone with a car, trash collection for each homes, etc., compared to a much smaller use of these resources for high rises.

[@harenterberge2632]

I lived in a high rise apartment block fo s few years. It was nice to have a view over the city, but I felt disconnected from the surroundings. Having to take an elevator and pass a parking lot added an extra psychological hurdle to go outside. Since I live on the ground floor again, I more often go for a walk, jog, or do something in the garden.

[@foobar9220]

Not sure if I would count having the bike on the balcony a plus. I do not want to push my dirty and possibly wet bike through the apartment., that needs to be somewhere easily accessible to just unlock and go. And this is where this high density starts to bite itself. A single level underground parking garage for cars already hits the limits at like 4-8 stories and for bikes at maybe double, considering that there is one bike per person and maybe a trailer. Also I think that ammenities like pools, gyms and a concierge are severely at odds with affordability ;)

[@HaonProductions]

I live on the second floor of a 14 story building... not much of a view but I got a great deal. Another unsung benefit!

[@thecountingthot7638]

I think the worst part of them is that they aren't often built in ideal locations, like you mention in Toronto. Here in Montreal we have an area of town called Griffintown which is well-known for these condo towers, ever since its gentrification in the last dozen or so years. However, griffintown is very bad for quality of life, since there are very few grocery stores and public transport around.

[@shauncameron8390]

That's unless you live anywhere near rue St-Antoine which Lucien L'Allier and Bonaventure are located.

[@TomPVideo]

I kind of miss living in a high rise for the amenities nearby. It had a train station, several very affordable restaurants, and a grocery store 5 minutes walk away. I was 15 minutes from my couch to downtown.

[@F4URGranted]

I'd like to 100% agree on your point about views increasing quality of life. In Charlotte NC where I moved from, I lived in a 5 over 5 style apartment in a young neighborhood. It was a small studio, but friends would come over to my place and want to hang out just because I had an interrupted 5th floor view of the skyline. There was nothing like sitting in a cheap chair and watching the stars fall over the city!