I lived in flats in the New Town of Edinburgh (i.e. fairly old buildings) for ~30 years and never heard a sound from neighbours - probably because the walls appeared to be ~1m thick sandstone!
I've lived in 3 flats across New Town and Stockbridge and every flat was horrible. I could hear the footsteps of people upstairs. Most flats have floorboards and they are not kind to the neighbors below. I'm not living in a flat ever again.
Admittedly we only lived in two flats - maybe we were lucky?
Edit: we lived in two flats for a total of nearly 25 years!
I live in a modern apartment in Norway (2019). I guess some of our heat insulation demands make it so that we get extra thick walls and floors, but I've never heard any noise from neighbors. No tv sounds, no stamping feet etc. Maybe twice a year someone drills a hole to mount something on the walls and I hear that for a few minutes. Even have a train passing by outside I can't hear with the windows closed. Point bein…
Having stayed in Norwegian houses many times, I can attest they've really sorted their insulation out. Similarily my Swedish sister-in-law always complains about British houses when she visits, saying their cold and draughty
British houses have a worldwide reputation of bad insulation. They live in a mild climate where you don't need to heat the entire house to ensure the pipes don't freeze, and don't really need much AC to be livable in the summer. As such it is really common for people who live there to only heat the room they are in.
> Only in South Korea more people live in collective dwellings than in Spain. I... have doubts. (Looks like they're only looking at OECD countries, so Singapore and HK, the most obvious counter-examples, are excluded.)
I’m tempted to think that the author saw those two examples (and Monaco) as cities more than countries, which, for an analysis of urban density makes sense. That would be like excluding the Vatican from an analysis of immigration.
Ah, yeah, I think it's fair enough to leave them out; they're very much special cases.
I live in northern ireland in an actual house and the walls are thin enough I could dip my bread into my neighbours' soup. It is the number one reason I could never see myself living in an apartment, I'm very sensitive to noise and I get disproportionately angry at even low levels of unwanted noise. I'd be too worried about noise from neighbours.
I want to second this. Living in flats sounds cute for most of the people who never lived in ones that are being built with cheap materials and thin walls. It's all nice and dandy until a sill neighbour moves in and then you've got nowhere to hide.
Living in a poorly built flat is a bad experience, sure, but there are well built flats out there, where you can only hear your neighbors if they're actually being loud--really not that big a problem.
The feasibility of widespread bike usage doesn't just depend on density. It depends a lot on a region's weather, too. Amsterdam, for example, happens to have weather that's relatively compatible with biking, all throughout the year. On the other hand, for four to six months of the year, most areas of Canada, and even a good portion of the US, definitely don't. While a very small handful of people can handle biking wh…
>On the other hand, for four to six months of the year, most areas of Canada, and even a good portion of the US, definitely don't. Myth. Why Canadians Can't Bike in the Winter (but Finnish people can): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU
No, it's really not a myth. Biking in the winter is not fun unless you have completely enclosed paths. Finnish culture means that people do it anyway, but that wouldn't fly in American culture, no matter how good the snow removal and bike lanes are. I say this as someone who bikes year round in a northern city, the vast majority of people have no interest in biking in the cold.
Different strokes for different folks. I’m a very happy single family home dweller. Living in a dense city feels claustrophobic.
Single family homes are fine. The problem in the U.S. is that it's illegal to build anything _but_ single family homes in the majority of suburbs. Wouldn't it be better if people had access to a walkable grocery store, coffee shop or park? Or if kids could safely walk or bike to school? Many communities have absolutely zero options and are completely reliant on cars in order to go about daily life.
Most suburbs also have higher density zones where you can have apartments. The single family homes get the majority of the land space, but there are also apartments and townhouses which are more dense.
Yes, but they got many things right in the Netherlands even with an incredibly low percentage of people living in flats. Bikes, not cars, please.
The feasibility of widespread bike usage doesn't just depend on density. It depends a lot on a region's weather, too. Amsterdam, for example, happens to have weather that's relatively compatible with biking, all throughout the year. On the other hand, for four to six months of the year, most areas of Canada, and even a good portion of the US, definitely don't. While a very small handful of people can handle biking wh…
In general the farther north you go in North America the more people on bikes you find. Most people do not bike when it is near freezing or below, there are a few.
Even in perfect conditions there's a lot of reasons not to bike. Distances are more difficult, you can't bring someone with you, your carrying capacity is much smaller for shopping trips. It also just plain takes longer to get anywhere and people just don't like spending more time than they have to on errands.
- Ebikes let you cover great distances with little effort. - You can have someone ride on the backseat or in the cargo space of a cargo bike. [1] - You'd be hard pressed to come up with a shopping load that won't fit on a cargo bike. [1] Then there's the cost vs a car [2], which will likely make up for any inconvenience. Of course, you do need at least decent bike infrastructure for this to be realistic. [1]: https:/…
My car is a lot less effort that my ebike. And the car is faster as well. I ride my ebike for the trips too long for the acoustic bike, but there are still a lot of trips not in reasonable ebike range that I make.
Spain also has the lowest fertility rate in Europe at 1.28. Not sure how much apartment living is cause or effect on that but it's a grim number. Every generation is only 60% the size of the one that came before it.
This is slightly aside, but the concerns over fertility rates in the first world really seem REALLY misplaced to me. Population growth concerns are easily mitigated with immigration which will stay in demand until the rest of the worlds fertility rates catch up(40+ years), and the population growth concerns themselves are a reflection of an outdated (or soon to be outdated) economic model that we should probably focus on replacing or phasing out? Im not sure why THAT isnt the next step, and instead we have so many whackos in government trying to force pregnancies and other wild policies. Yeah, its a hard, big, complex problem and will probably require a decade of modeling/testing like what is happening with UBI testing in small cities. Maybe its just a reflection of the times when the people we elect reach for the most insane heavy handed solutions for every problem, and proceed to publicly fill their pants at the very concept of change.
Even in perfect conditions there's a lot of reasons not to bike. Distances are more difficult, you can't bring someone with you, your carrying capacity is much smaller for shopping trips. It also just plain takes longer to get anywhere and people just don't like spending more time than they have to on errands.
- Ebikes let you cover great distances with little effort. - You can have someone ride on the backseat or in the cargo space of a cargo bike. [1] - You'd be hard pressed to come up with a shopping load that won't fit on a cargo bike. [1] Then there's the cost vs a car [2], which will likely make up for any inconvenience. Of course, you do need at least decent bike infrastructure for this to be realistic. [1]: https:/…
Imo, you are no longer talking about cycling once you're talking about ebikes and other motorized vehicles.
You're talking about convincing people to buy worse cars.
Motorbikes and mopeds and scooters already exist and people largely don't choose them over cars. Changing it to "electric scooter" or ebike doesn't suddenly make it more appealing.
And you certainly lose the "it's better for physical fitness and health" aspect once you're talking about motorized vehicles.