I was very explicit that I am discussing the land, not constructed surface.
My point is that the land close to a major attraction is forever scarce and thus expensive, and that this attracts only developers who want to build expensive constructions to maximize their return on investment. I agree with the article that this still pulls median prices down, but it does so by forcing middle class and poor people towards the peripheries. Taking this to the extremes, you get cities like Sao Paolo - with extremely expensive city centers and dirt-cheap favelas where people live in squalor.
Looking at my own city (Bucharest) this is very visible in new constructions - the farther away from the expensive city center most constructions are, the smaller the apartments, the less nicely looking etc. Of course there are exceptions, especially once you get to the suburbs, but this is the general trend for the city itself, and is a common trend in most cities.
My point is that the land close to a major attraction is forever scarce and thus expensive, and that this attracts only developers who want to build expensive constructions to maximize their return on investment. I agree with the article that this still pulls median prices down, but it does so by forcing middle class and poor people towards the peripheries. Taking this to the extremes, you get cities like Sao Paolo - with extremely expensive city centers and dirt-cheap favelas where people live in squalor.
Looking at my own city (Bucharest) this is very visible in new constructions - the farther away from the expensive city center most constructions are, the smaller the apartments, the less nicely looking etc. Of course there are exceptions, especially once you get to the suburbs, but this is the general trend for the city itself, and is a common trend in most cities.