Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 122 posts

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#91

Post by aaaaaaaaaab »

travisjungroth wrote: post #63
lou1306 wrote: post #12

Since nobody has cited it yet, see Christopher's Alexander "A city is not a tree" [0] for an architect's take on "natural" vs. plannes cities. [0]: http://worrydream.com/refs/Alexander%20-%20A%20City%20Is%20N...

Wow I enjoyed this essay. I'm enthusiastic about graphs, and have spent a few dinners with my girlfriend imagining designing our perfect city. I didn't expect to run into a well-written article at the intersection of those topics. For anyone interested, the ethos of our dream city is walkability. High density, mixed use buildings. The main "streets" are walking and biking only, with limited roads for service vehicles…

I guess there would be no winters in this city.

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#93

Post by golemiprague »

cperciva wrote: post #83
barry0079 wrote: post #3

I'm a huge fan of the winding maze like structure of cities built upon the old. It's nice to be able to wander and explore. I suppose blank slate cities (like most in America) are a lot more convenient to navigate though.

I enjoy being a tourist in winding mazes. But when I want to get to work? Give me wide straight roads.

And get stuck in hours long traffic jams? No thank you. Many congested cities are a better opportunity for a good public transportation. Compare LA or Sydney to Tokyo or London, congested cities are much more lively and most people have fast access to the action and to business districts unlike sprawled cities where only few rich people enjoy the interesting parts and the rest commute for hours to the boring suburbia. On the other hand they have bigger houses, wide streets and large parks so there is always a trade off, but getting to work is certainly easier in congested cities with good train system.

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#94

Post by icsllaf »

cperciva wrote: post #83
barry0079 wrote: post #3

I'm a huge fan of the winding maze like structure of cities built upon the old. It's nice to be able to wander and explore. I suppose blank slate cities (like most in America) are a lot more convenient to navigate though.

I enjoy being a tourist in winding mazes. But when I want to get to work? Give me wide straight roads.

Would there be a difference in commutes on work vs commutes dependent on driving? Much easier to walk in a winding maze than drive through it and you can put much more in the former than the latter dependent on the land-use and density.

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#95

Post by romwell »

aaaaaaaaaab wrote: post #91
travisjungroth wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow I enjoyed this essay. I'm enthusiastic about graphs, and have spent a few dinners with my girlfriend imagining designing our perfect city. I didn't expect to run into a well-written article at the intersection of those topics. For anyone interested, the ethos of our dream city is walkability. High density, mixed use buildings. The main "streets" are walking and biking only, with limited roads for service vehicles…

I guess there would be no winters in this city.

NYC has winters, and I never even thought of driving in Manhattan.

There are many ways to make a city walkable in winters, but for the most part, density suffices: the city acts as a shield and a heater.

As for having public transport at the edges of the city only - not a problem if that boundary is never too far.

For some part, Moscow has embraced this idea, with the so-called transportation "rings" (highways and subway) encircling the city - but they do branch inwards.

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#96

Post by romwell »

cperciva wrote: post #83
barry0079 wrote: post #3

I'm a huge fan of the winding maze like structure of cities built upon the old. It's nice to be able to wander and explore. I suppose blank slate cities (like most in America) are a lot more convenient to navigate though.

I enjoy being a tourist in winding mazes. But when I want to get to work? Give me wide straight roads.

>But when I want to get to work? Give me wide straight roads.

Why? Is getting lost on the way to work a problem? A month into working anywhere, you learn all the ways to get there anyway.

And a 45-minute tram ride to work on winding streets beats a 1.5 hour traffic jam on a nice, wide, straight 101 North any time.

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#97

Post by burntwater »

ElBarto wrote: post #57
close04 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At one point there was nothing where every single city now stands. Everywhere it started with a blank slate. Before the city there was a town, or a village. It's not blank slate > city, it's blank slate > something > something else > city. There's some evolution in the middle and that makes the difference. One grows organically over time and goes through different stages until it reaches the "city" stage, one is pl…

It starts with a blank slate... That's arguing on a distraction, though, as the key is planning, not blank slate.

But they are not necessarily planned as cities. They are first planned as settlements. Then planned as towns.

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#98

Post by sparkie »

ElBarto wrote: post #57
close04 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At one point there was nothing where every single city now stands. Everywhere it started with a blank slate. Before the city there was a town, or a village. It's not blank slate > city, it's blank slate > something > something else > city. There's some evolution in the middle and that makes the difference. One grows organically over time and goes through different stages until it reaches the "city" stage, one is pl…

It starts with a blank slate... That's arguing on a distraction, though, as the key is planning, not blank slate.

The key isn't planning, the key is population. A city without people is a ghost city. The city is as much the people as it is the infrastructure. Cities are alive.

It's like arguing that you can build a person by assembling organs in the right place. You can build a humanoid structure which mimics the human, but it's missing the most important feature: life. You can't simply instil life into something. It needs nurturing.

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#99

Post by travisjungroth »

jimmy1 wrote: post #64
travisjungroth wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow I enjoyed this essay. I'm enthusiastic about graphs, and have spent a few dinners with my girlfriend imagining designing our perfect city. I didn't expect to run into a well-written article at the intersection of those topics. For anyone interested, the ethos of our dream city is walkability. High density, mixed use buildings. The main "streets" are walking and biking only, with limited roads for service vehicles…

Your city sounds very unfriendly to people with disabilities, that are out of shape, or temporarily disabled that does not allow them to bike or walk (think having surgery on your leg, undergoing chemo, etc). I would at least have a tram, trolly or cable car, some type of green transportation that can get you from A to B quickly.

It's a pretend city, but I hope it would be much better for people with disabilities. Mixed use means short trips. Actual decent public transit on the service roads for longer distance.

Re: The Irresistible Urge to Build Cities from Scratch

#100

Post by souprock »

romwell wrote: post #96
cperciva wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I enjoy being a tourist in winding mazes. But when I want to get to work? Give me wide straight roads.

>But when I want to get to work? Give me wide straight roads. Why? Is getting lost on the way to work a problem? A month into working anywhere, you learn all the ways to get there anyway. And a 45-minute tram ride to work on winding streets beats a 1.5 hour traffic jam on a nice, wide, straight 101 North any time.

Wait, what? You think a 45-minute commute is good? The 1.5-hour thing is simply beyond the pale.

You need to get out of the urban megacity.

I've lived in several parts of the USA. My worst commute was 20 minutes by car, and my current commute is 3 minutes by car or 15 to 20 minutes by foot. These were all software development jobs.

The reason is that I choose small cities. I choose places that have suburban density, though they aren't technically suburbs because people aren't commuting into an urban megacity. The jobs are local.

Another nice benefit of this choice is my expenses. Houses go for 10% to 20% of what you pay in a place like the Bay Area, not even counting the extra land you get. Nearly everything else is cheaper too. Gas is half the price. Groceries are cheaper. Taxes are much lower.

Post reply on HN