[ggm]

As the article says, it's a trend which proceeded Covid, but accelerated under lockdown.

At best, the short term fixes are ameliorative. Free parking and lunch vouchers isn't going to "fix" this problem, and as the article also says (as have others published here) conversion to residential is a mixed bag: it is increadibly costly, major code issues abound, and from sales records has a high failure rate in the market: expectations of value differ.

I tend to think there's a massive listed property trust write down either gone through, overdue or waiting for China to finish falling over. Once the dust settles, the cost of re-development of the city core will differ.

I hang on a forum for city planning [*] regrettably called skyscrapercity.com -Regrettably because in fact, most cities are not skyscrapers and most cities with skyscrapers don't need more of them. I know I am an outlier in this belief in my home town (Brisbane) and it is fantastically difficult to bust through the persisting claims "taller is better" -In short (hah) it isn't always so, and it isn't the vision of the city we want to either work or live in, as this article points out.

It's not covid, it's us. We've been heading here for a long time. We don't like living and working in Canyons. Livable cities have a 15 minute circumference to everything you need including water, parks, shops, and services. They are built on a human scale which typically tops out at 8 to 10 storeys and have a small Central Business District scaled to the commerce needs. A very few world cities need more, and all of them are under significant stress regarding land cost, building cost, and heritage preservation. It is actually rare for WW2 to deliver scale opportunities for rebuilding, as it did in Rotterdam and Tokyo. I don' think proposing large scale bombing of major capital cities is a good planning move.

[*] https://www.skyscrapercity.com/

[dukeyukey]

> I don' think proposing large scale bombing of major capital cities is a good planning move.

You say that, but don't underestimate the awfulness of London's planning departments: https://academic.oup.com/joeg/article/21/6/869/6213370

[ggm]

Osbert Lancaster "pillar to post" if I recall correctly says that the GLC and it's precursor the LCC demolished more of Christopher Wren's churches than the Nazi bombers.

That's a great article btw. Thanks!

[JambalayaJim]

Downtowns are generally the only “15 minute” cities around in any urban area.

[rospaya]

Maybe where you live, but my commie block has basic amenities (shop, butcher, small farmers market, few bars and restaurants, park, doctor... etc) in a 10 minute walk. 10 minutes away are buses and trams that take me to whatever else I need.

[JohnFen]

> conversion to residential is a mixed bag: it is increadibly costly, major code issues abound, and from sales records has a high failure rate in the market

And it would mean living in a downtown area, which most people don't want to do.

In my town, the downtown area was a train wreck for decades, but they seem to have fixed it. They started by putting residential units around, but that had little effect. Since then, though, they've build quite a lot of boutique and fancy hotels. That did the trick. Downtown is lively now.

But it's also still not a place that people who live in the city go. It's for tourists. Good as a profit center, but it certainly didn't make the area a part of the community.

[freedrock87]

He states the reason why people don't want to live in downtowns. It's a self afflicting issue.

[sdwr]

Don't want to be that guy (am that guy :( ), but the word is "preceded" - came before. "Proceeded" means came after, and has a direct subject.

[ggm]

Can't edit now. Thank you for being "that guy". Dear reader. Please read what I wrote in the sense implied by "that guy".

[nobodyandproud]

I will proceed to reread the preceding GPs (I won’t).