Why is Manhattan so ugly compared to central London?

Is that right? Looks pretty grim to me...

Lovely...

This looks like a nice fixer...

The Great Fire of 1666

Is there a long wait list to live here?

Outside of the Georgian bits and Tudor fragments, London is one of the ugliest cities of its size, IMO. The Victorian stuff is occasionally bawdy fun but just as likely to be grimy and bombastic and there's shockingly little built past 1900 worth looking at. I'm actually one of the people who likes Trellick Tower, BTW. But that sort of architecture is being drowned out by the trashiest new skyline this side of Dubai.

New York City is uglier because of the scaffolding everywhere. I've never seen scaffolding to such an extant in any other city.

Does NYC have a central NYC?

It's called Manhattan.

London isn’t restricted to being on an island.

Central London is far more attractive than NYC because is has many lovely neighborhoods and magnificent buildings round every corner. But NYC is more efficient. It snows 1 inch in London and the entire city closes down.

R7. It makes you wonder what the 'end game' will be with all the scaffolding in NYC. Especially now the COVID additions seem to becoming permanent on sidewalks.

Unfortunately, those red clay bricks that make up a lot of lower Manhattan (and in a lot of other cites around the world) seems prone to rot after 100 years, it's the scaffolding that stops debris that would otherwise crumble into the streets.

At least for most of London (in parts that predate the industrial revolution), they used a lot of gorgeous stone in their buildings that will stand the test of time.

[...]

R2, those brutalist slums on Rowley Way, Camden are now fetching up to £600,000 for a 2-bedroom unit on the private market. They represent excellent value and are also lighter and more comfortable inside than they look outside.

It helps that they were built in one of the most desirable areas of London, just a short stroll from Regents Park.

Good news, with some scaffolding that was set up in 1999 finally about to come down.

Why has there not been some kind of treatment developed to protect red brick facades? One would think chemical companies would jump on this. $$$$

They can't really chemically treat them. Adding an external layer prolongs the lifespan by another 10 years, but does not really address the weakness that they are prone to rot from ground moisture and weather.

They can clean and regrout which is time-consuming and expensive, or rebuild portions of facade which is supremely expensive on an old building.

Red brick lasts for hundreds of years. It has to be maintained, like any structure.

Anyone who actually lives in NYC knows why there’s never-ending scaffolding. It’s called Local Law 11.

All that scaffolding is hideous..

Anyway, I'd rather be in London than NYC any day.

It's the people, OP.

New York City is run by the State of New York, much of which hate it although it should change now that NYC is the majority. It's ugly because they have no alleys so they have to put all their trash in front.

Not enough greenery in NYC. Yes, there's Central Park but not enough small parks. London is loaded with commons.

Ignore R23. In just two sentences, he managed to confirm his ignorance. NYS does not run NYC. The full barrels and bags you see in front of dwellings are due to the timing of residential trash collection; commercial waste is not collected by the city—it is private, with each business owner responsible for their own service.

Well sorry we didn’t have a royal lands, a Great Fire and a multi year Blitz to open things up in the landscape of our city to build fabulous little parks and squares like you did in London. But we do have the High Line and Bette Midler slipping in pocket parks wherever she can can!

I don't know which of the two cities has a more dreary drive into the city from the airport. I feel like killing myself during both rides in the back seat of my rented limo. Absolute truth.

I like what was done with the skyline in NYC. A defunct train rail line made into a lovely little park with greenery and gardens.

Why would you use a car in either city, from either JFK OR HEATHROW? There’s this amazing thing called public transportation.

That being said, your aesthetics are way off: if you are stuck in a car, the view of Manhattan on approach from JFK is always exciting to see.

Such nonsense. NYC >>>>> Lon when it comes to overall architecture and urban beauty. Fuck off you snaggle-toothed British cunt!

which is why Berlin beats both by a wide mile

High Line...not skyline...it's late here..

[Quote]Why would you use a car in either city, from either JFK OR HEATHROW? There’s this amazing thing called public transportation.

Public transportation? Pfft

New York State does run New York city. That's why the city has no power over the Port Authority, no municipal garbage collection, why it gets untreated Catskill water with pesticides, why garbage scows float around the harbor, why there is a lack of public space, why Robert Moses was able to do so many evil things, why so many of the sports teams play in New Jersey, why the prisons are a disgrace, why the subway is one of the ugliest and loudest in the world.... the list goes on an on. The US has never treated its cities as sovereign, and that makes all the difference.

It's also why Republicans can destroy cities like in Michigan and then blame it on Democrats. Because the public are so stupid they don't realize the states are 100% to blame for misgoverned cities.

R34 Each and every sentence in your post is factually incorrect. It’s only DL, but we are entitled to a modicum of intelligence around here.

[quote]London has a similar population . That is spread way, way more out. New York city is 300 sq miles with a population density of a whopping 29,000 people per square mile. London is 600 square miles with a population density of only around 14, 000 people per square mile.

They are really not the same, London is way more sprawling and less urban and dense than New York is.

London is more similar to Chicago in terms of how dense it is. And Chicago is cleaner than NY.

Another stupid thread stimulated by an inane question. They are very different cities- duh. And the scaffolding means the buildings are being maintained- sheesh.

Apparently the bar exam in New York is too easy and any chucklehead with a mail order training can get in.

A building by work (in NYC) had scaffolding that just came off. It was on for 10 years

R40 that’s only been the case for the last 5-6 years (basically when they adopted the UBE - same as the bar in many of the flyover states). It’s become such an issue as of late the NYS Bar Examiners are considering reverting back to the harder more NY-centric exam.

I always laugh when I hear recent LS grads complain about the NY bar. They really have no idea how much easier it is now.

R42 Ha!

R40 when I took the NY bar exam in 1996, the pass rate was 71%—I passed on the first try. When I took the California bar exam in 1989, the pass rate was 59%—I also passed on the first try. How many bar exams have you passed?

City on fire!!

There is a surprising amount of farmland in Greater London, 135.66 square kilometres of it.

If you have driven into London from Oxford, it is surprising how close to the city real productive farming starts to give way to remnant farmland, even as close as Wormwood Scrubs just north of Shephard's Bush there is still a farm.

Manhattan doesn't have alleys for hiding unsightly and smelly things such as trash and cars like Chicago and London.

Central London has green parks everywhere you look, with lakes and ponds. Manhattan has only one major park.

Fort Tryon Morningside Battery BPC HUDSON River park East River park Roosevelt Island Governor’s island Little Island

Each is a major park in Manhattan…just off the top of my head

Riverside Park High Line Madison Sq park Union Sq park

We could go on and on

Thank god that there are no alleys, there would be bodies everywhere

Both are interesting and pretty in certain parts and in different ways. London and Brooklyn are more similar,

OP, why are Londerers teeth so ugly compared to Manhattanites'?

The Governor of Michigan is a Dem, R35.