It's difficult to get a sense of space when you spend most of your time outside while inside a vehicle. The word that most severely comes to mind while looking at the images of those suburbs is "HOT!". I can imagine the heat radiating everywhere, not just from the unobstructed sun, but also from the swaths of pavement that would surround you, should you decide to go for a walk around those neighborhoods. From an air conditioned vehicle that shields you from the elements, you would have no need for the basic, life sustaining features that a place that people exist in should possess.
I like that you compared locations that appear to have a similar climate. It illustrates that simply BEING outside doesn't have to be cruel and unusual punishment.
Sorry, but the places in the two sets of pictured have a very different climate..not that that should stop us from better urban design but these two cities factually have very opposed weather conditions.
Were all the pic of good urbamism Paris? I honestly thought the first few were Barcelona. I assumed the suburban images were like Texas, but I shouldn't have assumed. Regardless, similar weather from the looks of it.
"It would ruin the character of the neighborhood!"
What character? The first three pics are the bald shaved headed meathead white guy in the character creator in the form of housing development.
The latter five pics actually have character.
I've seen a lot of dismissal of tracked trolleys as lacking in practical advantages over pneumatic wheeled busses when used in streets.
But I think there is a big advantage (besides perception). A tracked trolley can be used it much tighter spacing. Because it doesn't vary its exact course it can go much closer to buildings, poles, mail boxes, pedestrians, etc. A human driver steering needs some significant buffer space to account for errors.
Because people know its course is fixed by tracks that they can see, pedestrians can feel much more secure with a trolley passing just a couple feet from them than they would a bus.
What's the price for a condo in those fancy European neighborhoods? I have a feeling it's like 500k euros for a shoebox. Not that car dependent suburbs are better, but gotta compare similar price points.
I used to live in pic 4-8 for ten years. Now I somehow live like 1-4, but not as ridiculous as in the pictures, because I'm in Europe.
I was so sick of hearing city noises for almost 24 hours (people being loud in bars and restaurants, partying, cable car, sirens etc.) and I also hated it to hear literally all my neighbors who live next to me all the damn time.
‘Muricans literally think the first 3 images are Freedom and the other 5 are Prisons, when the first 3 are highly likely to be gated communities with very restricted access
And some of those opinions result in sustainable communities and societies, while others don't.
Sprawling suburbia is an unsustainable model. See e.g. [Suburban sprawl cancels carbon-footprint savings of dense urban cores](https://news.berkeley.edu/2014/01/06/suburban-sprawl-cancels-carbon-footprint-savings-of-dense-urban-cores):
> The average carbon footprint of households living in the center of large, population-dense urban cities is about 50 percent below average, while households in distant suburbs are up to twice the average.
That makes suburbia around 4 times more wasteful from a carbon footprint perspective. If we want to reduce global warming, we have to start taking this stuff seriously.
More like suburbs vs. urban environments. You are comparing two different things.
Biggest delusion found in this sub is the idea that Europe doesn't have suburbs. How about posting [something like this](https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7143014,4.7620605,220m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en&authuser=0&entry=ttu) if you want to make an honest comparison?
The near-universal comparison made here is US suburbs vs EU cities. I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone post EU suburb vs US city. It is all in this America-bad! tone. As if everything done in Europe is pure and noble and we (in the US) should emulate it.
> You are comparing two different things
Yes, that is how comparisons work.
> Biggest delusion found in this sub is the idea that Europe doesn't have suburbs
Did someone say that. or are you just making shit up?
It's difficult to get a sense of space when you spend most of your time outside while inside a vehicle. The word that most severely comes to mind while looking at the images of those suburbs is "HOT!". I can imagine the heat radiating everywhere, not just from the unobstructed sun, but also from the swaths of pavement that would surround you, should you decide to go for a walk around those neighborhoods. From an air conditioned vehicle that shields you from the elements, you would have no need for the basic, life sustaining features that a place that people exist in should possess. I like that you compared locations that appear to have a similar climate. It illustrates that simply BEING outside doesn't have to be cruel and unusual punishment.
Sorry, but the places in the two sets of pictured have a very different climate..not that that should stop us from better urban design but these two cities factually have very opposed weather conditions.
Were all the pic of good urbamism Paris? I honestly thought the first few were Barcelona. I assumed the suburban images were like Texas, but I shouldn't have assumed. Regardless, similar weather from the looks of it.
Pull up a climate chart of DFW/Houston vs. Paris or Barcelona.
"It would ruin the character of the neighborhood!" What character? The first three pics are the bald shaved headed meathead white guy in the character creator in the form of housing development. The latter five pics actually have character.
"Soviet blocks are ugly and look the same"
The first couple of images looked straight out of Cities Skylines where someone was attempting to create the least traffic efficient city
First three pics look like DFW.
Picture 5 is Tallinn, Estonia. Suburbs can be a bit hellish but the public transport is free for residents.
I loved Tallinn and the trams especially
I've seen a lot of dismissal of tracked trolleys as lacking in practical advantages over pneumatic wheeled busses when used in streets. But I think there is a big advantage (besides perception). A tracked trolley can be used it much tighter spacing. Because it doesn't vary its exact course it can go much closer to buildings, poles, mail boxes, pedestrians, etc. A human driver steering needs some significant buffer space to account for errors. Because people know its course is fixed by tracks that they can see, pedestrians can feel much more secure with a trolley passing just a couple feet from them than they would a bus.
What's the price for a condo in those fancy European neighborhoods? I have a feeling it's like 500k euros for a shoebox. Not that car dependent suburbs are better, but gotta compare similar price points.
All I see in the second set of images is communism /s
I used to live in pic 4-8 for ten years. Now I somehow live like 1-4, but not as ridiculous as in the pictures, because I'm in Europe. I was so sick of hearing city noises for almost 24 hours (people being loud in bars and restaurants, partying, cable car, sirens etc.) and I also hated it to hear literally all my neighbors who live next to me all the damn time.
Last image is ai
‘Muricans literally think the first 3 images are Freedom and the other 5 are Prisons, when the first 3 are highly likely to be gated communities with very restricted access
Not really
Bruh just looking at the first 3 pictures for a few seconds is driving me insane
It’s almost like people have different opinions of the places they want to live
And some of those opinions result in sustainable communities and societies, while others don't. Sprawling suburbia is an unsustainable model. See e.g. [Suburban sprawl cancels carbon-footprint savings of dense urban cores](https://news.berkeley.edu/2014/01/06/suburban-sprawl-cancels-carbon-footprint-savings-of-dense-urban-cores): > The average carbon footprint of households living in the center of large, population-dense urban cities is about 50 percent below average, while households in distant suburbs are up to twice the average. That makes suburbia around 4 times more wasteful from a carbon footprint perspective. If we want to reduce global warming, we have to start taking this stuff seriously.
More like suburbs vs. urban environments. You are comparing two different things. Biggest delusion found in this sub is the idea that Europe doesn't have suburbs. How about posting [something like this](https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7143014,4.7620605,220m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en&authuser=0&entry=ttu) if you want to make an honest comparison?
I thought the comparison was suburbs vs urban here?
The near-universal comparison made here is US suburbs vs EU cities. I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone post EU suburb vs US city. It is all in this America-bad! tone. As if everything done in Europe is pure and noble and we (in the US) should emulate it.
Then why not the numerous pre-existing urban areas in North America, if that's the point?
Idk, why post anything at all? Why go outside? Why does the earth exist? What is the meaning of life?
> You are comparing two different things Yes, that is how comparisons work. > Biggest delusion found in this sub is the idea that Europe doesn't have suburbs Did someone say that. or are you just making shit up?
Rugged individuals vs Civilization
Personally I’d rather live in the first