What are your thoughts on urban sprawl? Are there any benefits at all to it?
>increases reliance on cars
>low population density removes all niche/specialist stores, and all culture
>increased commute times degrades home life and happiness
>environmental impacts (rapid peaks in floodwaters due to removal of transpiration/absorption, deforestation, wildlife removal/migration)
>wasted airspace that will be extremely difficult to reclaim without buyouts or reclamations
>>67841914
Sprawl is disgusting. Concentrated, high density high-rise growth China-style, with a weekend/vacation house in the country is the best solution for a high population society.
>>67842431
We could have had that if we kept segregation.
>>67841914
Build vertical and invest in real public transit or your city will turn into a hopeless mismanaged shithole like Seattle
>>67842521
Please explain how the two relate
It is horrible. In the Greater Los Angeles Area you need a fucking car to get anywhere. Take one good look at North Orange County all the way up to Northwest Los Angeles. It is just a concrete jungle.
>>67842677
Forcing people with incompatible values and cultures into close proximity with each other destroys social cohesion and generates conflict.
>>67842851
No, constant immigration with no breaks for cultural assimilation causes these issues.
>>67842677
Integrated public facilities leads to a massive wealth transfer from whites to blacks. Additionally, blacks commit substantially more violent crime than whites.
>>67841914
Just when I was about to go to sleep (work a 4am shift), an urbanism thread appears.
There are pros and cons, but overall I hate sprawl. The reliance of cars and especially on Arab oil is a big problem in my opinion, hopefully we ditch the fossil jew for alternatives. Not even a lib environmental argument, it's just to kill the source of Muslim wealth.
Culturally speaking, suburbs are usually bland as fuck but the good thing about low density is that conservative beliefs are maintained. What I really hate about suburbs is the way things are planned - you can't walk anywhere and overall pedestrian, bike, and bus networks are really lacking in most areas. Near total dependency on the automobile without alternatives.
From an environmental perspective it bothers me when fringe suburbs are built into formerly undeveloped land over 20 miles away from a major urban center. It's sad to see displaced animals in former territories and farms get destroyed in favor of tract housing. It's getting harder to find huge tracts of pristine land around anymore and the view from an airplane window is depressing, looks like cancer down there. I just want to go innawoods sometimes and not see any fucking houses for miles.
Single family detaching residential development can work and has its place, but the way it's done here is retarded.
>>67842851
I agree, but that could still happen with vertical growth. Sprawl was partially a consequence of self-segregation, and would have still happened if blacks never left the south, because other races separate too, and people separate socio-economically as well.
Colonials (US, Canada, Aus, NZ) hate density. We still like to LARP as explorers and settlers. I'd rather live on Coruscant than LA though.
>>67843236
City politics are the result of concentrated underclass, and a large population of young people starting out. The suburbs aren't inhertently conservative, working famlies are inherently conservative. If there were more families and upper-middle class permanently settled in cities, they would be more conservative. With the urban cores becoming expensive, and people actually being pushed to the periphery, it will be interesting to see how urban politics change this century.
>>67841914
Great thread OP. I was jsut reading this about how Turnbull, unlike that shitcunt Abbott, actually wants to invest in a few trains to reclaim the notion of the '30 minute city' the idea that commutes longer than 30 minutes degrade quality of life. https://theconversation.com/the-30-minute-city-how-do-we-put-the-political-rhetoric-into-practice-56136
There's some interesting stuff about getting private developers more involved in not just the funding but the planning of public transport.
>>67843236
Yeah the loss of land, either farmland or wilderness is discouraging. Suburbia seems to be taking our BEST, most arable land first too. We are creating a possible food shortage if it continues.
>>67842851
>>67843145
>>67842851
Sorry fuckheads but we're talking about urban fucking sprawl here.
South Korea is an amazing example of urban environments done right. On every street there are numerous local/small businesses, and the public transportation is excellent.
>>67843236
Exurbs are a cancerous outgrowth of real estate that have thankfully been stymied by the burst of the housing bubble in the states.
While the land is often cheaply bought former farmland and sold (relatively) cheaply, the people buying up such residences are usually middle class or upper middle class who will slowly come to realize an hour commute, spotty service, and dwindling/nonexistant neighbors makes for a bad living situation.
>>67841914
It's worth noting that while the early 20th century planners and architects in the United States dreamt of the freedom afforded by cars, they also dreamt of tall, shared living spaces with green spaces in-between. Ultimately capitalism said green space was unprofitable and built more homes, communism said green space was unnecessary and built more commieblocks, and both saw cars as status symbols. Hence today's mess.
It's a shame that such effort goes into maintaining lawns and such resources go towards individual commutes when the time and capital could go towards better land usage and a less alienated society.
>>67843681
It's interesting, the mass migration into the cities might be the determining factor for returning cities to more conservative like they were in the past. The urban cores are not only expensive because of demand, but also because of poor planning. In most cities I visit there are massive wastes of space that could be infilled and help handle the influx of people instead of forcing them to build outwards. Surprisingly large densities can be achieved just by filling up the empty areas of downtown cities with 4-6 story development instead of isolated skyscrapers. Land use here is extremely inefficient, if zoning laws were changed to allow for more compact and efficient development, cities should become cheaper, at least temporarily until urban cores are completely filled like Manhattan, sans the skyscrapers.
>>67843904
New suburban growth takes up valuable farmland, and that displaced farmland must move further out into undeveloped land. Even if the suburbs were abandoned to large degrees, it will take a lot to rehabilitate that land back into farmland and it's more worth it to let it rot and let nature reclaim it after decades of abandonment.
>>67841914
Just a phase on the road to a glorious ecumenopolis.
>build a town
>town gets big, so you build up
>down town gets crowded, so you sprawl out
>land in the sprawl gets expensive, so you build up
Repeat until there are 100+ floor buildings from sea to shining sea.
Fuck the tree-huggers.
>>67843904
Immigration causes rapid population growth, one of the contributing factors to the increase in sprawl. This is especially true in the US where almost all population growth comes from immigrant communities. Yes, it is possible to end up with sprawl with a stable population or some other development patten in connection with rapid growth (Soviet apartment blocks are one example) but in general sprawl happens hand in hand with population growth, which is here due to immigration.
![Chicago_Gridsprawl_km10-1024x1024[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/mcTJTZE.jpg "Chicago_Gridsprawl_km10-1024x1024[1].jpg")
>>67843681
The main obstacle to something like that is the extremely low quality of urban schools in most of the US. Not only are they low-performing, but they are outright dangerous, especially for white kids.
Parents have to send their kids to private schools, which is very pricey in dense urban areas. Upwards of $30,000/year starting in elementary school.
American suburbs were a function of demographic self-defense to some extent.
Cities need more plant life integrated with the architecture. People are so disconnected with nature and it's driving our monkey brains mad, something no one wants to recognize. Luckily the top architects of the world are on board with this new city life.
>>67841914
I honestly believe the government will go cyberpunk on people and force them to live in underground cities, with each level having its own floor. In that way, you can tell the status of a person based on how close they are to the surface of the world.
>>67845169
Exurbs as in the traditional streetcar neighborhoods that existed prior to WWII? Or newer low density developments right next to downtown commercial districts? Or those godawful commieblocks mentioned in the rest of your post?
I've lived in a suburb for most of my life, and in the years of commuting far away to college and work, usually putting on about 50 miles a day on my car, it sucks. Nobody really talks to their neighbors and there is almost no sense of community here. I would live in an urban area if I could afford it, or just give up on society and get myself a little house in the middle of nowhere and live off grid and self-sustaining. I like what cities have to offer but often they're too "liberal" for me.
>>67843918
What South Korea does horribly wrong are those bland commieblock-like apartment buildings, like a batch of a bunch of identical buildings following failed Corbusier "tower in a park" ideas.
>>67845493
I would probably go mad in such a world, not that the environment would be gone, but that there would be nowhere to go where you can be away from civilization, pic related.
Those dense shitty suburban areas are the absolute worst. Im in the inner city now and getting sick of it but won't leave until I can get set up pretty far out. Sprawl areas somehow give you no nature and no civilization at the same time.
>>67841914
Eventually we'll get Judge Dredd.
That's a thing we can ALL believe in.
>>67843904
you've had a long night sarah, go to bed
>>67849253
>implying I'm not Scott.
Just so you guys know, nature has an effect on the human brain. When we are deprived from it, like in our concrete jungle cities, it's not good at all.
Our bodies rely on absorbing oxygen, not just through the lungs but the skin as well. In the cities the air quality differs quite greatly to the countryside, or a forest.
Studies have shown that cognitive function, qualitative thinking and dopamine production all improve while under the effects of increased oxygen as a result of nature.
Your sense of smell, taste and sight will also adjust after 3 days in the wild, for the better.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2016/01/call-to-wild-text
Now this is not about saving emissions and that shit, but more about integrating trees within our cities.
We need to, before shit gets bad and the quality of humanity declines. The longer this goes on, the worse it will get.
And if you're feeling like shit, go spend some time in nature, it really does help.
I'm the furthest thing from a greenie faggot, but this opened my eyes to the science behind it. We are meant to be integrated with nature and removing us from it is not good for our psychology or anatomy.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/07/22/how-nature-changes-the-brain/?_r=0
>>67851131
Some more sources.
http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ecam/2014/834360/
http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_nature_makes_you_kinder_happier_more_creative
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204615000286
>>67841914
Urban sprawl= massive immigration.
curtail immigration, problem solved.
but we are basically screwed since globalist neoliberal elites are on both parties here in USA, where immigration is welcomed.
>>67851131
That sounds like some first class horseshit. Oxygen content of the atmosphere is measurable to obscene precision, and there is no evidence that "nature" provides significantly more of it.
>>67852617
This. Urban sprawl is caused more by "diversity" than anything else. White flight is what builds the suburbs.
>>67842760
the best is if you hike to the top of mount baldy on a clear day, you can see all the way to oxnard and down to dana point.
>>67845332
>let nature reclaim the suburbs
You can actually see this happening in Washington Park, IL (a STL suburb)
>>67846239
somebody designed this
what a waste of fucking effort
>>67854004
2nd that, we couldn't breath if we weren't "absorbing oxygen", its pretty much everywhere, anywhere that atmosphere penetrates.
>>67846239
This is why school choice programs (voucher schools programs) are so needed.
There would be no gentrification in downtown Milwaukee or Cleveland if it weren't for school choice.
>>67841914
^ THIS ALL DAY
OP is /B/ASED as fuck
>"the market will fix it!"
Ya, sure it will.
We're starting to hit major head winds now.
The cities need to go taller & not just for the uber rich offices & condos.
