Hacker News Reader

Comment by kevcampb | Hacker News Reader

Does anyone have any idea of the costs of building vertically?

I ask as I generally love the idea of sky-rise buildings and high density housing. To me, Hong Kong feels almost utopian - like some sort of architects' playground. Stick thin apartments rising up through hillsides. Super dense housing, but the ability to travel 30 minutes and be in remarkable countryside. It really is remarkable.

I'd love to think this is the way forward, and regardless of opinion it seems the way the world is moving. People are migrating to mega cities, the world is urbanising. I guess the efficiencies you gain living this way are part of a real draw there. You don't need a car. Mass transport is cheap and efficient.

Which makes me wonder how Hong Kong's housing situation can be so dire. Even for the well off, the costs are prohibitive, and I dread to think how the poor manage.

View on HN

Construction costs generally rise with the height of the building, both due to higher structural demands and because of additional functional (usually also legal) demands - like two elevators and two fire escape stairways for buildings higher than 8-10 stories. Maintenance is also more expensive for higher buildings. Higher buildings also demand larger distances between them to allow light and ventilation. Because of that - except for places with unusually high density like Hong Kong and parts of Manhattan - the sweet spot for high density, construction costs and quality of life might lie in the 5-7 stories range (typical for Paris and Barcelona). Regarding Hong Kong housing situation - in spite of the high level of economic freedom in other areas, the housing market is in a large part state controlled, with waiting lists for buying an apartment.

On the other hand, it has been argued that skyscrapers can be detrimental. In A Pattern Language it's stated that "There is abundant evidence to show that high buildings make people crazy", and it goes further to propose a pattern of a four-story limit for dense urban areas.

In A Pattern Language it's stated that "There is abundant evidence to show that high buildings make people crazy", and it goes further to propose a pattern of a four-story limit for dense urban areas.

Fucking terrible idea. I almost certainly know more about mental illness than you do. What makes people crazy in urban areas is expensive real estate. It's not signing the ridiculous rent checks that does it-- that's just annoying. However, moving involuntarily-- especially when due to adverse economic circumstances-- has a huge detrimental effect on mental health, even inducing illnesses such as schizophrenia[0] which might otherwise be thought to be purely biological.

[0] Schizophrenia, like cancer and depression, probably isn't one disease. There are at least 5 different schizophrenias.

Next to genetics and drug abuse, the strongest predictor for mental illness is whether a person had to move involuntarily for economic reasons. Traditionally, this was a cause for the high rate of mental illness in urban areas. (However, the recent housing catastrophe was a mostly suburban phenomenon; we'll see in about 10 years if that results in suburban MI levels exceeding urban ones)

If you ban high-rises, real estate costs become extreme. Just look at what it costs to live in the Village if you don't believe me. Or look at San Francisco's problem. It's not nearly as dense as New York, but almost as expensive because of the NIMBY assholes.

Bad bad bad fucking idea.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com