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

Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 64 posts

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#11

Post by snogglethorpe »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #3

I think what this signals is not that there is something particularly backwards about China. Chinese suburban sprawl shows that no matter the style of governance or how markets deal with housing, it seems like people converge on the same poor urban planning practices. Or, you could interpret the similar mistakes as proof that real estate in America is dealt with in a way that's far from free. Texas, the heart of the…

If you look at Japan, which generally has much looser zoning practices, it's managed to do much, much, better. It has sprawl and excess road construction too, but the sprawl is much more transit-oriented, and Japan has generally done a far better job avoiding the worst stupidities of U.S. post-war development.

I'm sure there are many interacting reason for this, e.g. Japan's poverty in the decades after the war meant that cars weren't even a possibility for most people, and the sheer population of cities like Tokyo meant that mass car usage wouldn't be remotely practical even if everybody could afford a car.

But surely China has many huge cities as well, and the average citizen still isn't very rich...

My guess is that in Japan, developers just followed the money and did what's practical, and that meant building transit and transit-oriented housing. In China, on the other hand, with its strong centralized control, developers are probably more likely to be influenced by what the fat cats in the party hierarchy want—which is more roads for their Mercedes, and more "western-like" development which they associate with wealth and privilege—even if that isn't so sensible according to the situation on the ground (and isn't so good for the average citizen, or for the future)...

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#12

Post by hueving »

jlmendezbonini wrote: post #10
martythemaniak wrote: post #7

The short, glib answer is "The same reason teenagers don't learn from their elders' mistakes". The longer answer is a combination of: - poor people want what rich people have. And if they can't afford the substance (private country estate), they'll still get the style (McMansion). They particularly want last generation's rich people's things, as this generation's rich people's things are have not gained widespread po…

>- suburban sprawl has low up-front costs with real costs coming in decades later, as North American suburbs are starting to experience today Would you mind elaborating more on this? More specifically about the cost the North American suburbs are starting to experience. thanks

Difficult to implement any kind of useful public transit that would obviate the need to drive everywhere.

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#13

Post by Alphasite_ »

sampo wrote: post #9
nichtich wrote: post #6

I've heard about failed city planning a lot, and I wonder is there a good example somewhere? like a booming city with more than 5 million population that have "good" city plan? which city is best in this regard?

> I've heard about failed city planning a lot, and I wonder is there a good example somewhere? Cities with functional public transport and walkable neighborhoods: Tokyo, Seoul, London, New York City, Paris, Berlin. Maybe also Madrid and Singapore, but I don't know much about them. Edit: Maybe Osaka and Nagoya, too (I don't know much about them either). All these have over 5 million population.

Singapore is excellently planned from what I can see. Dubai is another as well.

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#14

Post by venomsnake »

jlmendezbonini wrote: post #10
martythemaniak wrote: post #7

The short, glib answer is "The same reason teenagers don't learn from their elders' mistakes". The longer answer is a combination of: - poor people want what rich people have. And if they can't afford the substance (private country estate), they'll still get the style (McMansion). They particularly want last generation's rich people's things, as this generation's rich people's things are have not gained widespread po…

>- suburban sprawl has low up-front costs with real costs coming in decades later, as North American suburbs are starting to experience today Would you mind elaborating more on this? More specifically about the cost the North American suburbs are starting to experience. thanks

First that comes to mind - obesity.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/08/blame-the-...

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#15

Post by chipsy »

jlmendezbonini wrote: post #10
martythemaniak wrote: post #7

The short, glib answer is "The same reason teenagers don't learn from their elders' mistakes". The longer answer is a combination of: - poor people want what rich people have. And if they can't afford the substance (private country estate), they'll still get the style (McMansion). They particularly want last generation's rich people's things, as this generation's rich people's things are have not gained widespread po…

>- suburban sprawl has low up-front costs with real costs coming in decades later, as North American suburbs are starting to experience today Would you mind elaborating more on this? More specifically about the cost the North American suburbs are starting to experience. thanks

In sprawl, the city is bearing most of the risk: all the developer has to do is throw up some more cookie-cutter detached homes and sell them, while the city has to keep all of the grid infrastructure and services to those homes running for decades to come; low density sucks up the budget that could otherwise be used to create big-ticket service improvements like transit. At the bottom end, this can send suburbs into a Detroit-esque downward spiral where they are no longer viable.

Developers are much more grudging in taking on the economic risks of infill projects with higher densities, but even low-rise, 3-4 story buildings are sufficiently dense to push this equation in the other direction and make city services more sustainable and cost-effective.

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#16

Post by narag »

sampo wrote: post #9
nichtich wrote: post #6

I've heard about failed city planning a lot, and I wonder is there a good example somewhere? like a booming city with more than 5 million population that have "good" city plan? which city is best in this regard?

> I've heard about failed city planning a lot, and I wonder is there a good example somewhere? Cities with functional public transport and walkable neighborhoods: Tokyo, Seoul, London, New York City, Paris, Berlin. Maybe also Madrid and Singapore, but I don't know much about them. Edit: Maybe Osaka and Nagoya, too (I don't know much about them either). All these have over 5 million population.

Madrid has an excellent public transport net. I sold my car two years ago, no regrets.

But there's also a lot of traffic.

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#17

Post by jrapdx3 »

Interesting subject. If the question is "to sprawl or not to sprawl" (that is, urban sprawl), like most truly serious questions, there's no good solution.

I live in Oregon, where we have strict urban grown boundaries. Here in Portland, light rail has been developing since the 1970's and still expanding. Bicycling is pushed by city leaders. "In-fill" housing is going up in most every part of town.

Utopia? Not everyone thinks so. Sure "urban sprawl" is mostly avoided, and farmland is preserved. But road traffic is a nightmare, and the toll of increasing population density is palpable.

Now there's talk of the undesirable effects of "vertical sprawl", a reaction to the ever-increasing height of new condo buildings and the like. There's a growing murmur of objection to the "canyon-like" landscape that many feel has a negative impact on urban quality of life.

So here we are again, there are always trade-offs, which is less corrosive, suburban or vertical sprawl? Maybe it just goes to show, we can overdo any good thing.

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#18

Post by WildUtah »

sampo wrote: post #9
nichtich wrote: post #6

I've heard about failed city planning a lot, and I wonder is there a good example somewhere? like a booming city with more than 5 million population that have "good" city plan? which city is best in this regard?

> I've heard about failed city planning a lot, and I wonder is there a good example somewhere? Cities with functional public transport and walkable neighborhoods: Tokyo, Seoul, London, New York City, Paris, Berlin. Maybe also Madrid and Singapore, but I don't know much about them. Edit: Maybe Osaka and Nagoya, too (I don't know much about them either). All these have over 5 million population.

Barcelona and Osaka are also well known for doing a good job at facing the challenges of developing a big city. Nagoya and Taipei have been mentioned to me as examples, too.

Mexico City deals every day with the challenges of having grown very fast to 20 million before it became rich. New subway and BRT lines, infill development, upgrading properties, and progressive transit and construction planning keep the place getting better to live in and easier to get around every year. Phasing in pollution and emission regulations as they became affordable and regulating polluting industries out of the region step by step worked well, too. In spite of the famous chaos of Mexican government, Mexico City will soon mark thirty years of effective governance and planning, so it can be done. If Mexico can do it, China and the USA -- which are usually considered to be only somewhat worse governed than México -- could probably do it, too, someday.

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#19

Post by new299 »

snogglethorpe wrote: post #11
doctorpangloss wrote: post #3

I think what this signals is not that there is something particularly backwards about China. Chinese suburban sprawl shows that no matter the style of governance or how markets deal with housing, it seems like people converge on the same poor urban planning practices. Or, you could interpret the similar mistakes as proof that real estate in America is dealt with in a way that's far from free. Texas, the heart of the…

If you look at Japan, which generally has much looser zoning practices, it's managed to do much, much, better. It has sprawl and excess road construction too, but the sprawl is much more transit-oriented, and Japan has generally done a far better job avoiding the worst stupidities of U.S. post-war development. I'm sure there are many interacting reason for this, e.g. Japan's poverty in the decades after the war meant…

I guess it helps that one of the major transit operators in Tokyo is also a land developer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyu_Corporation

Re: Why haven't China's cities learned from America's mistakes?

#20

Post by WildUtah »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #3

I think what this signals is not that there is something particularly backwards about China. Chinese suburban sprawl shows that no matter the style of governance or how markets deal with housing, it seems like people converge on the same poor urban planning practices. Or, you could interpret the similar mistakes as proof that real estate in America is dealt with in a way that's far from free. Texas, the heart of the…

no matter the style of governance or how markets deal with housing, it seems like people converge on the same poor urban planning

Actually, the USA is known for its soviet style command and control urban planning. China is known for direct state control as well. In either country you can expect to be told what you can build, how big it can be, setbacks, parking, street access, and lot sizes. USA cities are laid out with some of the worst urban planning practices in the world and markets have nothing to do with the rules and regulations imposed.

So recent bad Chinese practice and the USA are two examples of the same model. Neither is liberalized.

Does the liberalization of housing law lead to sprawl?

Actually, market oriented building doesn't lead to much sprawl anywhere. Sprawl must be imposed by law or central direction of development or it isn't economically viable.

Nobody has figured out modern living in an efficient way, I think.

Of the world's eight big (10MM+) first world cities, half of them are famous for housing and transportation that is affordable to the middle class. And each of them has found its own way to achieve that happy situation, so there are a lot of models for efficient modern living, even under the stress of a large population. All of them have medium density (150/hectare or 40k/mi^2), more than SF but less than Brooklyn, big subway systems, high rates of home ownership and low rates of personal car driving, but the differences are substantial.

Seoul has lots of apartments and high rises mixed into its tightly packed single family homes with a variety of street widths. Tokyo has very narrow streets and small blocks with mostly new single family homes on small lots. Mexico City is more European with low rise flats and apartments and mews townhouses mixed with small lot single family tiny homes in the suburbs that are expanded with new floors and extensions on the lot as the family grows. Osaka has a mix of those.

Each of those cities is nice and and reasonably low stress place to buy a home and get around the city.

The other four large first world cities are driving out their middle class. London and New York are famously unaffordable, possibly with prices driven by sprawl and water or a greenbelt. Los Angeles is choked with sprawl and traffic. I don't know what's going on in Paris but I hear it's expensive.

So some places have figured it out. And some haven't.

Post reply on HN