Is there any practical advantage to single family detached houses compared to commieblocks?
It would seem that commieblocks located in large cities would have these advantages:
-Proximity to work and food increases efficiency, productivity and reduces the amount of wasted resources.
-Centralized transportation becomes viable, making the system even more efficient.
-All utilities are an order of magnitude easier to distribute because of the high population density.
Why are we still wasting tremendous amounts of space on suburbs when commieblocks are cheaper, more efficient, more ecofriendly, and economically superior?
Because they're fucking depressing
This is why scientists are not in charge of social development and social planners should not aspire to "science"
>>8189927
Lower suicide rate.
>>8189927
you may have noticed that cities across the developed world are filling up with apartments
>>8190003
senpai pls go
>>8189927
I once saw a project that aimed to rework some old commieblocks in a canadian city. It talked about a lot of the problems they had and their plan to fix them.
I don't remember much about it and I can't seem to find it. I remember there was some problem along the lines of there being less of a sense of community. They planned to create an outdoor market at the ground level to increase foot traffic and gardens or something (don't quite remember) where people could socialize. There was a lot more as well.
In my opinion the whole social aspect is probably the biggest issue. You can't think of these as just individual people living in commieblocks but as families and generations of families. For instance, a kid living in the suburbs will find it easier to meet other kids among their neighbors than a kid in commieblocks for the sole reason that the suburban kid is more likely to see them. In commieblocks you have far more people in the same area but for the most part the expectation is that they each stay inside their block since hallways simply are not a place to hang out. I think adding lobbies and hang out areas (kind of like the ones universities have) would go a long way in making those places more livable.
Owning a house grants you more freedom, as you own the property. You have much more control over your living space.
>>8189927
>outward aesthetics
>Maintenance problems
Though honestly I think we should begin to expand our cities upwards rather than expanding outwards. But not like that.
>>8189927
If "best" is defined as "an environment that humans want to reside in and have a tight community" then no. Both commieblocks and American suburbs fail for the same reason: people get alienated. In the former it's because units are small and extremely segregated (ie no communal spaces), while the latter are excessively large and extremely segregated (ie, no communal spaces).
The "best city/neighborhood" design is probably 2-3 story townhomes put close to things like stores or workshops. Examples include most of New England (high end) and trailer parks (low end). Both are "small" enough where people have to interact with each other and can walk places, but are "large" enough where they can get some privacy.
>Why are we still wasting tremendous amounts of space on suburbs when commieblocks are cheaper, more efficient, more ecofriendly, and economically superior?
Because it leads to Pruitt-Igoe or Cabrini-Green. High density units are ONLY more efficient if they are filled up entirely. The same is true for any form of bulk transport: the biggest ships on the ocean are only energy efficient *if* they are run fully loaded. Even at just a half load, most become massive fuel hogs. Though with buildings substitute "maintenance cost" for "fuel cost".
One of the reasons why American styled suburbs took off is because they're scalable. A developer can build as demand increases, and can build only to match demand, and thus never have any unused units.
Also, high-dense living requires a similar amount of infrastructure (ie, mass transit) backing it as well. Oftentimes this is not the case.
>>8189927
Human productivity tends to increase with happiness and health.
>>8191778
Nice picture. Actually, those are not the densest kind of buildings: there's a lot of space around them.
5/6 floors buildings like those in Paris are denser (up to 40k inhabitants/km2 where I live) AND a lot nicer.
No way.
These are fucking rabbit cages.
It's like asking for people to go mad.
>>8191778
Insightful post. Thanks anon. I don't know why you say that american suburbs are segregated. Houses are usually built very close to each other. In my experience, there tends to be more of a sense of community in suburbs than large apartment buildings or condos.
People who purchase detached single-family houses usually do so to raise their kids. The proximity of the houses allows for the kids to reach one another quickly, and there are two notable communal places in the suburbs: the street and local parks.
>>8192120
>more of a sense of community in suburbs
bitch i haven't ever seen my neighbors living more than 200 feet from my house
it's fucking depressing
>>8189927
>Is there any practical advantage to single family detached houses compared to commieblocks?
A fire in a block can kill a whole lot more than in detached houses. Evacuation is slower.
In war a bomb run can kill a lot more efficiently if people live in blocks.
Diseases spread much faster the closer people live together.
Blocks are rarely sound proof between apartments.
>>8190023
the problem in the west with them is that they will be filled up with trash/shitskins, and anti-discrimination laws mean you can't preserve any sort of community
Otherwise I'd say they would be fine
>commieblocks = depression
where did this meme come from?
i live in one, lots of ppl i know live in them, noone is fucking depressed because of that
>>8190023
This is the opposite of what was seen in communist Era communities
