• @Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      Tokyo is the most populous city on the planet with like 3x the population of Paris, and yet it’s remarkably affordable. Why? It’s easy af to build there. Japan has a simple, nationwide zoning code that makes it extremely easy and streamlined to build new housing.

      Clearly Tokyo has found the room. Paris has plenty of room.

      • @AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Tokyo density 6 200 / km²

        Paris density 20 000 / km²

        Tokyo may be larger, but you’re comparing two very different things.

        • @Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          16
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You’re comparing only the cities proper. A better comparison is urban areas, i.e., the contiguous built-up regions, as stats for cities proper are skewed by the arbitrariness of municipal boundaries and stats for metropolitan areas are skewed by often encompassing large amounts of rural areas.

          To compare urban area densities:

          • Tokyo urban area has a population of 39,105,000 and an area of 8,547 km2, for a density of 4,575 people per km2
          • Paris urban area has a population of 10,859,000 and an area of 2,854 km2, for a density of 3,805 people per km2

          Tokyo is more dense.

            • @Fried_out_Kombi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              141 year ago

              The urban area is what people refer to as Paris. A good comparison is Los Angeles. Lots of people say they “live in LA” but in fact live in Santa Monica or Long Beach or Pasadena or any of a million other suburbs that together form the Los Angeles urban area.

              When people say they live in Paris, 99% of the time they’re not talking about the arbitrary municipal boundaries; they’re talking about the urban area.

              When people say they live in LA, 99% of the time they’re talking about the urban area.

              When people say they live in Buenos Aires, 99% of the time they’re talking about the urban area.

              When people say they live in Tokyo, 99% of the time they’re talking about the urban area.

              “Urban area” is simply a term meant to capture what people mean when they refer to a city, unrestricted by the arbitrariness of municipal boundaries.

            • @novibe@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              81 year ago

              What…? The “urban area” is the built area. If you lived in the “non urban area”, you’d live in a park or something. I don’t think you understood what the commenter and the data meant.

              • @AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                01 year ago

                People who have never been here confuse Paris and its suburbs.

                Paris is one of the few cities that has never grown. It has kept its size of 1860. So there are no places to build stuff on.

                There are other cities around Paris, which are part of the urban area, if you like, but which are seen as less desirable by the locals.

                Sorry, urban planning isn’t just a one size fits all thing. Each location has its own specificities. Paris grew that way. That led to a specific set of problems that aren’t just solved by just building new stuff.

                • @novibe@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  41 year ago

                  Just let people build more vertically, prohibit investment into real estate and build more public housing. Expand public transport to areas around Paris and build public housing around it.

                  Like there are fixes, there are examples of places resolving issues like this.

                  Look at China for example.

                  Paris already has pretty good urbanism and city planning. But the REAL solution is decommodifying housing, and the government would never do that as landlords are some of the most powerful people politically everywhere.

                  • @AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    21 year ago

                    Paris has a bit over 22% of social housing at the moment I think. It’s constantly buying real estate to create more. And any new project has to integrate 20% of social housings.

                    As for the rest, there’s strong reluctance against high buildings because they would change the skyline of the city. There are a few, here and there, but they aren’t liked. Obviously, they would contribute to adding some new dwellings on the market. But apparently, the people prefer a tense market with a “nicer” city. Things may change eventually.

            • @afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t know why you are saying this. I know areas that are officially part of NYC that are less developed than areas around the city. The line of where a city ends and begins is a government thing not a reflection of where people really live. Just compare say Jersey City to anywhere on Staten Island.

              • @AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                Don’t compare how a random us city works with Paris. Different cities work in different ways and the people who live there don’t necessarily see things the same way.