Hacker News Reader

Comment by neom | Hacker News Reader

What's wild to me as how little has changed. I lived on Mulberry at Canal for a long time, the builds for all intents and purposes are exactly same buildings. After that I lived on Ainslie at Lorimer in Brooklyn, again, buildings are for the most part, the same. Then I moved to Union and Ainslie, this is the only area that has changed substantially, most of the buildings at this intersection have been totally demolished to make way for new condos, but the buildings between the condos and on the smaller side streets are pretty much the same. I always knew this when I lived in New York, but looking at it this way is quite visceral.

View on HN

It's incredible--even some of the finer details like advertisements painted on the sides of buildings seem to be unchanged.

For example, the two bottom banners can still be clearly read on this warehouse between 44rd and 45th on 11th ave: https://i.imgur.com/EXJUMrL.png

I looked up my neighborhood and it’s literally the same. In fact, the place where a supermarket used to be is exactly where the supermarket is now.

I guess from a community perspective, the defaults for where to place the town church, market, park are pretty easy to figure out and needs little changing.

Side note:

If someone’s bored, would love to just hold up my phone and see the historical pictures of a building, seems like this api could allow for it.

AR can’t come soon enough.

This was on HN previously, and one stood out to me, there was a single family house (Either New York or Kings county), it had a small yard, the only change was one of the corners was converted from a bathroom to an entrance I think. All else has remained the same.

The freestanding house I grew up in (in Fieldston in the Bronx) looks just like it did when I was a kid. And it looked the same in Google Streetview until the pictures of that neighborhood were pulled (presumably at the request of the neighborhood association).

Governors Island (at least the only photo they have of it) seems to be wildly different to when I visited recently. I don't know the full history of the island, but that seems to be one of the places where it's actually less populated than it was in the past.

Governors Island has a really interesting history! Link for the lazy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governors_Island

Interestingly there's no pictures of the Rockefeller University or Weill-Cornell Hospital, though they are both clearly there in the aerial photos. The big apartment building Rockefeller housed me in at 63rd and York is a rundown factory at that time.

I think the photographs are all of properties on which property tax is paid. Also, I loved in that building too, when my ex-wife was doing her medical internship at the Animal Medical Center.

It seems like a market failure that there has been no incentive to tear down and upgrade any of these old buildings as the land has become more valuable. Or maybe it's a regulatory failure.

Property developers have to buy up the section of a block to demo(lish) and build something worthwhile. Many of the buildings are individually/family owned, with little incentive to change/think about change or some pride in passing the building down generationally. If you have an annuity (rents) sitting on top of appreciating land value and you're old or a son/daughter (usually living elsewhere collecting a rent cheque), why bother/how can you convince your neighbors to as well? That's why the section around Ainslie and Union I mentioned was able to be converted, they're all business/warehouses, a condo there now was in the 1940 picture an auto repair garage with the same footprint as the condo, but the house next to it still stands as is.

Is "demo" for "demolish" common usage?

EDIT: non-native speaker trying to improve my English by asking questions about English used in the wild; not trying to be judgemental

My friends in the trades have used the word fairly regularly. I'd say yes.

Very common in the US and Canada but probably not outside (updated my comment).

Common in New Zealand.

Not in the UK. I'd be very confused by that usage. "Demo" means "demonstration" or "demonstrate". Maybe builders might use it that way but I've not ever heard it.

Native-born bi-coastal boomer American here. Never heard this usage until my house was remodeled and the general contractor used it. I had to stop him and ask what he meant. (I didn’t feel too stupid since the vowels and syllable stress are different.)

Or maybe a cultural and societal win...

I have to respectfully disagree. Tearing down and rebuilding is not a universal good, and I wish we were more careful about building well in the first place and preserving the history and context of the people who came before us. To me this means that the initial build was well-conceived and a good long term investment as that capital and labor expenditure has lasted a long time. Tearing down and rebuilding is wasteful.

I would've thought in an ideal world you would do things sufficiently well the first time so that you don't have to tear down the old work and redo it again. Not the opposite.

The ideal world upgrades incrementally.

You're saying it's better to get something wrong and fix it than to just do it right the first time?

I think he is saying, ideal world changes a little bit all the time, instead of tear down and redo.

I guess we're saying the same thing then, because my point wasn't that you'd never build anything new, but that your old stuff would remain just as useful and you wouldn't need to destroy any part of it.

This is an economic failure, but not a market failure. The failure is precisely because of rising land-use restrictions obstructing the market, especially in key centers of the economy, like New York, and especially since the 1960s:

https://eml.berkeley.edu//~moretti/growth.pdf

Wall Street too is wholly recognizable, almost indistinguishable if it weren’t for style of cars and dress.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com