4 ms·
I think you're right and it's also important to note that high density cities do not necessarily have to be cities full of skyscrapers. Old cities with narrow s
by farnsworth 6y ago
I think you're right and it's also important to note that high density cities do not necessarily have to be cities full of skyscrapers. Old cities with narrow streets between short buildings can be very dense. American cities tend to put huge 4+ lane roads everywhere, and require setbacks on buildings, and this has a big impact on density and the distance you have to walk to get anywhere, but if you are accustomed to that, you hardly notice it. It's possible to build sustainable density on the "human scale".
- AnthonyMouse 6y agoHaving a lot of space between buildings is actually necessary if you're going to have 50 story buildings for reasons of light and fresh air. But not everything has to be Manhattan. We could get appreciable increases in density merely by rezoning a lot of single-family housing to allow for five and ten story buildings, which don't require that level of offsets.
- 627467 6y agoI have lived in south China (extreme high rise and skyscrapers), a global city in Europe (mid rise) and south America (a sprawling mid rise city with lots of cars). I'd say the south Asia felt much more human scale due to easy access to parks, untouched hills and nature in general. South American sprawl was the worst in terms of easy access to 'nature'. So I guess it depends what you consider human scale.
- farnsworth 6y agoPersonally my ideal living space would be a huge highrise built on top of a grocery store and a transit station and next to a park. But many people are just so opposed to this kind of urbanism that I think it's always worth bringing up alternatives. I lived in a flat European city too and loved it.