They use the flatiron building because it's very famous but essentially a nuisance at this point having been vacant for iirc over a decade because of a lawsuit.

Ed: since 2019 but that's quite awhile for the most famous like 2sq miles in America. (Which is also weird but we'll talk about that another time.)

[–] andallthat@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Ah thanks for the context, I didn't know! But doesn't my point essentially stills stand?

As more people work from home and more Flatiron-like buildings struggle to find businesses looking for offices, developers might find "ex prestigious office to luxury apartments" a more appealing conversion than "ex Walmart to affordable housing".

Also, my understanding of the housing crisis is that people can't find an affordable place to live close enough to where they work. In my country there are plenty of small towns that used to be very pretty places to live, that have very affordable housing and that are turning into ghost towns because all the jobs are concentrated in a few big cities.

If you take away the offices, less people are going to need to live in New York, San Francisco or London. Plenty of people might still choose to, of course, but there should be less competition to rent the last bed space in a filthy apartment at ludicrous prices. Or to buy a small flat in a converted former office.

[–] SnowBunting@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago

Some people choose a location for the amount of things to do. Like the bigger cities offer more bars, fairs, gyms, and other niche stuff. Meet ups are also a bit easier. This could change as people move out of bigger cities.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

You're point holds, I just wanted to point out why they used it as an example.