Town planning thread

Continued from We'll start with a picture of Houston (TX) and the topic of the thread is, is urban density desirable? Do you favour American or European urban design?

Feel free to post pics of what you see as an ideal urban area, or your own urban area.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=8oOSKba9kQ0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Toronto.

...

...

...

Mountains are so beautiful. We don't have any in Australia and it's so sad.

Mexico City - "waves of human garbage".

If you guys started a USA based town, I would move, but probably seek minor leadership position mainly because I genuinely cannot trust you guys to make harmonious, balanced thoughts, although I do love doing things for fun, but seriously, you niggers would get cops here so quick (inb4 we get our own meme cops) arresting our asses for basic shit, on top of making horrible racial decisions (race is 100% cultural).

What do you mean a USA based town?

I like around where I live in south NJ
european style

How does that city even smell? I imagine pretty fucking bad.

Any mexicans here who can report?

at least its not india.

much love mexibros

American Art Deco (oo any other style as long as it is only one) for the very center and get more and more European the more far away you are.
>Center: American. Super dense
>Inner ring: Paris-like architecture (7 story buildings with a lot of squares and places hidden from sight unless you go and search). Dense (in order to not waste energy in transporting resources(
>Outer ring: Germal-like rustic architecture (no more than three stories high, a lot of wood and with many threes and natural scenery). Not dense (but the inhabitants must be vell connected, help each other as a community and be partially self-sufficient)

...

It's better in

It's really sad because low income Mexicans keep reproducing like rabbits and making their improvised shitholes and spreading like cancer.
When I was in highschool, I could see the hills and mountains that gave a nice view to the school. Now a days just the tips are green, everything else is filled with shitty gray houses.

Nice, it has that recognizable american-european style though. Which is not necessarily bad at all.

Radial>Organic (not allways)>Gridiron>Loose grid>dogshit>Pajeet>abo>nigger>Suburban

>"Ciudad de México" or "Distrito Federal"
It is the biggest city by population outside Asia. So of course you are getting diferent smells. It goes from nothing, dust, swamp (Close to a water source), poverty and royalty (once you enter the onlt real castle in America; Castillo de Chapultepec).
Get someone who knows the city and go, it is actually very nice if you stay out of the metro (smells like Paris) or the very poor zones

its haddonfield nj, only a square mile, but it doesnt get better. No mosques, no temples, just churchs and great community.

Town based around freedom being the only desirable trait, with love underneath, and good to all, so a Constitutional place.

>Race is cultural
>I'm in charge or else

Liberals

That is both American and comfy, seriously, fuck whoever made sub-urbane design

>is urban density desirable?

pic related

The idea of the CBD is already dead in the US, and was dying in Australia before we decided to make it very difficult for companies to set up office and business parks on the fringe next to highways.

Now employment being in the CBD is used to justify urban densification and all sorts of degenerate ideologies.

london

this thread is relevant to my interests

>No mosques, no temples, just churchs and great community.

Nice, contrary to Sup Forums memes europe has tons and tons of places like that. Pretty much every city that is not too big is what you describe.

>and was dying in Australia before we decided to make it very difficult for companies to set up office and business parks on the fringe next to highways.

tell that to the 1-hour-commute

i'm of the opinion that the CBD should be separated between multiple "satellite CBDs". it fucking pains me as a planner to step outside of my house and see the miles and miles of detached dwelling residential projects with not a fucking corner store in sight.

Radial? Have you been to Paris? That shit is hard to navigate and drive through. It's borderline 3rd world tier. Grid is always the best. Save the organic BS for old European cities for muh culture and history.

organic grid>pure grid desu

Are reasonable dense cities bad? The cost of moving resources (with current technology) is less than in bigger cities, people spend less in transportation and tend to walk more (and thus knowing the city better and growing more attached to it) and people are more intimate to each other because they live very close to each other and are more likely to use the same routes when walking. The magic word is balance; never go full American nor Asian

is that an airport on the beach?

Planners caused this mess in the first place. Land use restrictions in Australia have STOPPED employment decentralisation. They think it's a good thing that all good employment is in the CBD.

We need 1 acre lots as standard and all new employment to be on the fringe, not in the CBD.

IIRC, Berlin is pure grid right? At least city center?

Grid for city centers will always be the best. Anything else is just inefficient cancer. As far as residential, lose grid is fine.

dont have a proper road to connect the beach to the regular road grid, so it had to be concrete... made it look decent up close with rocks and some parking lots for the lazy visitors

it's not bad, really, but the issue is trying to get people to want to live in commieblocks. it's not an environment a lot of people want to raise a family in, but it's where older couples and young people like to live.

believe me, i know how fucked the system is. the trend here is to announce on a federal level that we're going to do one thing, then have the states to the complete fucking opposite.

Houston's urban sprawl is a necessity of the city's environment. The climate and atmosphere both make open natural spaces rest stops between miles of heat and death no one would want to wander in. We're essentially a quiltwork of indoor complexes, transport systems and suburban areas. And the sprawl only seems complicated if you don't live here. It's actually pretty easy to understand.

Houston is a City of three 'Downtowns'. A is for the official downtown, our big wheels, oil tycoons, official governmental and convention centers. B is the Medical District, doctors, physicians, cancer research is all done there. And finally, C, the Galleria and Williams Tower seen in the OP, where retail, enterprises, top hotels and visitors are located. In this triangulation lies the only bits of Houston worth a Damn, entitled D. This is where the Rich people live and make money for the rest of you ungrateful little shits, and is definitely worth a visit for all the excellent restaurants and museums there.

As we are a Southern city, we used to keep our animals in line and as such have conditioned them to take refuge in East Houston, labeled N for NigNogNook. This is where our degenerate hood people dwell, and while it would be a danger to cross, our city planners have been able to construct a port 50 miles inland and massive Freeways, as Niggers are both scared of heights AND water, to safely ferry proper business to and from the safe zones.

W stands for West, the great plains of westward oppurtunity for Whites (and some asians and jews) to galvanize upon. You'll find most people who can't afford proper Houston live here and dream of someday being worth enough of a damn to be part of Houston Proper. The stars are for the special cases of Nasa Nostalgics in the Southeast, and the Woodlands faggots who like traffic for some reason. Our Grand Parkway project (SH 99) is designed to connect the great West to the Woodlands, and (League City but Nasafags can't into change.)

The federal government has absolutely no power over urban planning, and that is a good thing. Centralisation will only fuck us up harder.

It must be emphasised, that the federal government cannot control spatial planning, and has no power whatsoever to do so. That is the domain of the states.

>pic related: Sal Luis Potosí, A Mexican city done right
Organic grind with some radial grid elements. Simple colonial infrastructure. Small houses. Many city squares and places for people to interact. Made with local recourses and everything they built must follow the style of the city.
>Commie blocks
Presentation is the key. If you let them live in a fary-tale like city then they will live there. Don't be lazy and make the place look pretty

What about emergency services? police? volunteer fire fighters with professional/paid paramedics?

This all day erry day

OP from last thread here. Rate my town.

...

Stick a nice big fat church in the middle of that Radial grid = perfection

*non-flashy protestant church

The town looks a bit sad but the landscape i amazing.

Town 5/10

Location 10/10

who here /hates shopping centres/

one got put in my town a few years ago and it almost completely destroyed all local downtown buisnesses

Density is more economically efficient. However, this must be balanced with individual preference for space and comfort, etc.

Ultimately, the free market should fix it.

You can literally only shop in big box stores and shopping malls and such in my town and most of Norway. Most norwegians avoid everything that isn't well known big brand stores.

how does the free market fix ?

serious question

I hate them but for a different reason than you.

They always start as nice shopping centers where small businesses (yes, a small because Walmart is everywhere) thrive. It's usually by the suburbs and mostly white.

Over time, nigs and spics start noticing that these white people are stupidly trusting their car in an open parking lot for hours, and start stealing them and property inside them.

Whites stop going because they're robbed, stores shut down because there's no income, and you get another abandoned mall to break into.

I do, they are a danger both for the locan economy and the culture of the town. And they usually only follow one style: American.
And having everything so centralized makes people not know the city, they get to their cars and completely forget about what's in the middle of their trip.

Local business was apparently outcompeted. The chain stores offered products and services that people wanted at a lower price than the local stores. The free market fixed it.

I can't stand city layouts at all, every time I go to cities I feel nauseous. Pic related is something like where I live. Small, tight-knit fishing community in quaint houses where everybody knows and relies on eachother.

...

do you see any negative repercussions of this?

hypothetically, is it fixed if an entire small town relies on chain stores for groceries and other goods, and in turn these stores provide the majority of employment?

is the situation 'fixed' if small businesses can't compete int heir startup phase, thus eliminating them entirely?

What plane is this? Looks like a modified canberra.

Yes, it is fixed. Small business can't compete with the large-scale production that chain stores have. That is, while they provide the same kind of products and services. Plenty of small businesses survive and even thrive, though, because they offer superior or different products and services.

I live in a small town, and there are McDonalds and Burger Kings, Walmarts and Targets, etc. But there are local stores, too. They offer superior/different products. Just can't compete with chain stores if you have a mediocre product.

Should also add that the only city I actually legitimately like is St. Johns, only because it manages to keep the flavor of a rural fishing town. The entire downtown is literally comprised of the same exact houses for the past 300-400 years, and they haven't been torn down for cultural reasons.

FUCKING BEAUTIFUL

is that a lego city?

People complain about chain stores driving out small local competition, but it's not the chain stores who did it, it's the people, voting with their feet.

>is urban density desirable?

Absolutely. Sprawl is ugly and ineffective. High density is good in the long term.

Pretty much a lego city. It's the only comfy city I've ever been to, everywhere else I've been is soulless, plastic hipster shit with no flavor. Most cities are a place where culture dies.

Ehhh... True
But chains are also in the blame
Wallmart commited fraud when entering Mexico, they are illegally here and destroying local brands because sweat shops in India are cheaper labor

If Mexicans didn't shop there, they'd go away.

Aesthetic as fuck

Los Angeles is based

The UK's cities are ugly as fuck because they're old as fuck

Wish we designed our cities 300 years ago instead of like 1000 years ago :x

Not a great pic.

Consumers are idiots tho. Every system that relies on the public falls because of that.

Los Angeles is either suburban shit, Chicano town or hipster crap.

People should be walking or cycling to work, or using clean and efficient public transport. The fact that so many people use cars to commute shows our infrastructure does not function properly.

Come take a virtual tour of literally the comfiest place on Earth: youtube.com/watch?v=8oOSKba9kQ0

Who here hates the extensive and unnecessary use of /o/?
Climate change real or not they polute the cities, take space in homes, take space in cities, make people slower, their parking lots are ugly af and could be unsed on something better, cause accidents to be even deathlier and give lazy fucks an excuse to remain fat

Cars are superior to all other modes of transport.

I pity you pleb faggots that have to commute otherwise than by car.

I forgot to add, Every family should have a gas car, but only use it when necessary. The last thing I want is people being dependent on state and state infrastructure for transportation and evacuation when the possibility of a happening is always there

>Los Angeles

>People should be walking or cycling to work,
Fuck off gommie. Cars is best transport ever from consumer point of view though it is expansive. Fact that people use cars shows that they are rich (they and their society). There is steady positive correlation around the world between cars per capita and available income.
Poorfags use public transportation.
Richfags use cars.
It is that simple.

Los Angeles is legit the ugliest city on the planet.

Los Angeles is mostly post-WWII suburbs with isolated pockets of density. Most of LA is decayed, sprawling wasteland. The "hotspots" of the city, like Downtown, Koreatown, Hollywood, Westside, Sherman Oaks, North Hollywood, etc, are pretty cool. But 80% of the city is bland.

This is the only acceptable living situation.

What I prefer eh?
>should be located in the country
>Trees, animals and all that shit all over the place
>the density of houses is like 2km a part from eachothers
>no niggers
>no sand niggers
no fucking swedes
>guns
>lots and lots of guns

Oh, and I would also like that there would be a brewery near by.

I would agree that most American cities suck. I think the Phoenix Metropolitan area takes the cake for being the worst. It gets to 115 (46 celsius) in the summer. The city is one strip-mall after another. That city shouldn't exist.

You're not thinking of LA the right way

Once you start thinking of Central LA as the actual city and the rest being suburban addons it makes a lot more sense as a traditional city

American Cities got too big too quickly and maintained the "old style city planning" at their heart which is largely incompatible with the newer grid and highway method of road planning especially.

Canadians cities besides Quebec city, and Montreal are a perfect example of how North American city planning is the best on the planet by virtue of simply being not as old
inb4
>Hurr durr x city planning is shit it's so crowded
Density is not an example of failed city planning
>x cities roads are so bad this city is better
Sure, cherrypick, but North American cities layouts are far superior to most notably European cities in terms of planning.
Go look at the Calgary skyline with the mountains in the background.

Also, no. Thinking of L.A as its proper definition is retarded. Use the limited megalopolis definition (not including Las Vegas or San Diego).

L.A is a city of about 13-14 million people and is the definition of urban sprawl. It's retarded to think of the city as the city core and then "suburban addons" as they do not act and operate on their own. They operate with L.A exclusively.

North Central Wisconsin sounds like the place for you

Downtown was shit until it started to gentrify within the last 10 years. And parts of the central city such as Westlake and Skidrow are probably beyond saving. I was in the McArthur park area last week for the first time in years. Absolute 3rd world country.

I grew up in the Valley, which is mostly within LA city limits. There's nothing to do with the exception of Sherman Oaks and NoHo. It doesn't even feel like LA.

I think you've confused Los Angeles with somewhere like Phoenix or Orlando.
Yep, Phoenix is a complete shithole.
This guy gets it. The parts of Los Angeles worth living in are just as dense and desirable as San Francisco.

Ah, Humanity wakes on the shores of Hildorien! Tolkien would love that pic!

So what? The suburban add ons don't take away from the central city. They add to it, as the name suggest.

Yeah I've always quite liked the look of Calgary.

SEND HELP

gopnikfag knows what's up. thank god finland is one of the less cucked yuro-countries in terms of cars, as a lot of our soil is pretty rural > moar freedom and cars.

Central georgia.
Yes we have niggers, but pretty much just in town.
I don't know of any within 10 miles.
>own a forest
>deer, turkeys, foxes, eagles, etc etc etcv.
> most people on 50+ acre lots
>local hardware store has bigger gun inventory than a lot of actual gun stores. (They have multiple .50 cal Barrets in stock)
No brewery, but we have moonshine...

based

How can other cities even compete?

Go to the northern banlieus of Paris and then see if your opinion still holds.

But yes, the central are of Paris along the Seine is the most beautiful large city in the world.