EDIT: Oof, that's quite an error on my part. I was absent-mindedly conflating "downtown areas" with the whole city. My bad. Never the less, I'm skeptical that this change will amount to much in terms of lower property values, but I'd be happy for someone to articulate why my skepticism is misplaced.
Maybe we are thinking of different things but I see the average US city as suburban with 4 people per quarter acre lot. Paris is 10-100x more dense than that. That's why public transit is far more effective there.
> The French capital has 56,000 people per square mile while NYC, the most densely settled U.S. metropolis, has only 27,000 people per square mile
Manhattan and a few select sections are denser but US cities are sprawling.
edit: the Bois de Vincenne is roughly three times the size of Central Park (10km^2 vs. 3.4km^2).
NYC, the most densely settled U.S. metropolis, has only 27,000 people per square mile
Manhattan is the relevant comparison, and it has almost 71,000 per square mile counting Central Park.Barcelona's 'superblock' structure boasts the highest density in the world (exceeding the world's densest city overall, Manila, and looks like this:
https://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/news/shutterstock_...
A good chunk of Parisian suburbs is already among the most densely populated areas in the world:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_proper_by_popul...
I do imagine that a high rise is going to be more dense than a Parisian 5-story. I understand that Parisian apartments are smaller and they aren't going to have parking or on-site greenspace like a US high rise, but I would be surprised if they are still less dense. Of course, that doesn't validate my original claim that Paris is sparser than US cities.