6 ms·

It's interesting - but it's hard for me to see this being the future of urban life when most of the city looks entirely suburban (not very walkable), separated

by imilk 4y ago

It's interesting - but it's hard for me to see this being the future of urban life when most of the city looks entirely suburban (not very walkable), separated from the main commercial area without bars/restaurants/shops in their own sub-neighborhoods. I would expect a key part of future urban life would include one of the most important parts of current urban life; walkability and a harmonious melding of commercial, residential, and public spaces.

Mo3 4y ago
I lived there for a year. I think you forget that everyone owns a bicycle, everyone rides their bicycle everywhere, and almost every single street has a separated bicycle lane. There are more bicycle lanes than in any other country on earth (22,000 miles in a country ten times smaller than California) [1], there's even bicycle highways and intersections. Public transport is exceptionally good as well. Everything is highly walkable and accessible, everything you want to do is doable and everywhere you want to go is reachable. You should check it out sometime, these pictures don't really show it. (jacquesm in this thread is spot on too though. There's not that much life going on in Almere itself.) [1] https://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=7&lat=51.48412&lon=8.08713&layers=B0000 https://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=7&lat=51.48412&lon=8.0871...
- sandworm101 4y ago
  But every parking spot in the picture seems to have a car parked in it.
  - Mo3 4y ago
    Of course there's still cars. They are just not used exclusively or frequently. If I remember the statistics correctly, in cities trips are made 30-45% by bicycle, 25-40% by public transport and the rest is cars.
- imilk 4y ago
  I've never been there and was just making a quick assessment by Google Maps. It is nice that you can bike anywhere, but I'm mostly seeing residential neighborhoods (~10 blocks wide of identical row homes) pretty spaced out around a town center without amenities in their area. So in terms of meeting someone for a coffee/meal/beer/event it looks like you'll have to hop on a bicycle unless you want to go on a 20-30 minute walk past monotonous homes. Which is not that different than suburbs anywhere else.
  - Mo3 4y ago
    Of course there's going to be some level of separation between residential areas and other areas - but contrary to, for example the US, where you have to walk for miles or put your life in danger bicycling between a suburb and the city center - the distances are quite negligible and the space in between is friendly towards anything that is not a car. Public transport intervals are measured in minutes, and unlike in the US, it not only connects the suburbs to the city center, but the suburbs to other suburbs as well. Really, everything you want to do is doable and everywhere you want to go is reachable. I miss it. Regarding coffee/meal/beer, there's little shops or cafes or restaurants mixed into the residential areas as well. This video details the fantastic engineering very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP-G-inkkDg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP-G-inkkDg This is specifically about differences between US and Europe but also a great watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8KEoZwMRY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8KEoZwMRY
    - imilk 4y ago
      I guess so but I'm seeing 1-2 restaurants/bars in sub-neighborhoods that are about 1.5km wide. I'm not saying the city is bad by any means, I'm just saying that it falls very short in what I would hope to be the "future of urban life". Maybe the future of smaller towns or exurbs. But there seems to be a lack of necessary dynamic spaces that change in character throughout the day as people flow in and out that you look for in great urban areas.
      - Mo3 4y ago
        I mean, it is an experiment. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm sorry the BBC is dependent on clickbait titles, but Almere is really nothing too special as I have also mentioned in my original post referring to another users great post here. Some of these concepts have been in place in other cities around the Netherlands for a while, and (imo) work better there. There is not much life going on in Almere, which might explain the lack of density of restaurants or whatever you see. It's really just that Almere is artificial land reclaimed from the sea, so they have quite a lot of space there to experiment with their weird metal houses and green roofs. Almere is a little less dense than other cities nearby.
- brailsafe 4y ago
  As someone who's lived in cities inspired by Garden City, this looks very British (by their own admission) and extremely suburban. So I gotta agree with the parent's observation. The only difference being small streets which inherently slow traffic, and probably better bike and public transit infrastructure, but everywhere has good public transit if it's tiny now. The garden city movement was a giant compromise between city and rural life, almost by definition. This is one of the most suburban places I've ever seen, it just might be marginally more Dutch of one. There's literally a Dunkin' donuts, Starbucks, and Chanel store all within what looks like a place you drive or bike to to then walk around for a bit and leave, which to me is reminiscent of some places on the outskirts of L.A. Seems like it would probably be better to just ride your bike to Amsterdam if what you want. On the other hand, that's just my observation. What did you get out of living there? Was it the quiet, or the parks? Did you meet people easily?
  - Mo3 4y ago
    I was not a particular fan of Almere (please refer to jacquesm’s post on details), however, it being a Dutch city, various general benefits of Dutch city design and engineering also apply there - these are what I am really trying to point at. Almere itself is rather boring and devoid of life. It’s simply artificial land reclaimed from the sea with no history or story to it.
- jltsiren 4y ago
  Urban areas are not just walkable but walk-centric. They are built under the assumption that most people don't move faster than 4-5 km/h. Places that want to attract people must be close to each other in local centers, or people don't go to them. Bicycles are more suburban than urban. Because they allow people to move flexibly at a relatively high speed, they encourage suburban structure, where things are spread out over a larger area. They are functionally similar to cars, but on a smaller scale.
  - ethanbond 4y ago
    Uhh… this seems like an excessively pedantic distinction. What’s the source of truth you’re pulling from here?
    - jltsiren 4y ago
      People may have different definitions for "urban" and "suburban". Regardless of the words used, there is a huge difference between a city designed for walking and a city designed for people using vehicles (cars, public transport, bicycles).
      - calt 4y ago
        Just move bicycles from being grouped with cars to being grouped with walking, and you're correct. Dutch cities are designed for walking and bicycles. It helps that the bicycles are also designed for dutch cities. Upright, comfortable, a bit heavy and slow, and can be locked up for short times without needing to be locked to anything.
        jltsiren 4y ago
        You can't design a city for both walking and bicycles. You can only make compromises between them. The slow Dutch bicycles are still 2.5x to 3x faster than the average pedestrian, which makes them convenient for distances most people would not consider walkable. If most people are comfortable with using bicycles over such distances, it encourages a more spread out urban structure. People often use bicycles in cities because they are convenient and as fast as or faster than driving a car or using public transport. That is the reason why bicycles should be grouped with other vehicles and not with walking.
- Melkman 4y ago
  Indeed, Almere is a sleeping city. Many inhabitants moved from Amsterdam to Almere since gentrification has made housing in Amsterdam almost unobtainable for people with a median income. Almere is comfortable enough and you can get by without a car. But the fun still is in Amsterdam only a half an hour train ride away. In the US it would be called a suburb of Amsterdam.
mpol 4y ago
Almere is very walkable, just a bit boring. Cycling is okay too, although it needs a bit of work I think. In regards to cycling, it is not that popular in Almere. Not sure why, it could be that rudimentary, half of the people is upper middle class that is doing everything by car, the other half was born in another country and could more easily find a house in Almere compared to Amsterdam but they don't share the cycling culture much. Edit: And every neighbourhood has supermarkets and small fastfood and bar locations. It is not that different from other dutch cities.
- imilk 4y ago
  Sure, but it falls a bit short to be in the vision of "future of urban life". There are a sprinkling of commercial businesses in the gray areas of the map outside the city center. But not nearly enough to be considered urban by any means. And most of the areas where people live seem quite far away to be considered "walkable" from the commercial district. I'm sure it's a nice place to live, but this is not the future of urban life. https://imgur.com/a/xgbRE15 https://imgur.com/a/xgbRE15 (I put a 1km marker on the map for reference)

by imilk 4y ago

Mo3 4y ago

I lived there for a year. I think you forget that everyone owns a bicycle, everyone rides their bicycle everywhere, and almost every single street has a separated bicycle lane. There are more bicycle lanes than in any other country on earth (22,000 miles in a country ten times smaller than California) [1], there's even bicycle highways and intersections. Public transport is exceptionally good as well. Everything is highly walkable and accessible, everything you want to do is doable and everywhere you want to go is reachable. You should check it out sometime, these pictures don't really show it. (jacquesm in this thread is spot on too though. There's not that much life going on in Almere itself.) [1] https://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=7&lat=51.48412&lon=8.08713&layers=B0000 https://www.opencyclemap.org/?zoom=7&lat=51.48412&lon=8.0871...

sandworm101 4y ago
But every parking spot in the picture seems to have a car parked in it.
- Mo3 4y ago
  Of course there's still cars. They are just not used exclusively or frequently. If I remember the statistics correctly, in cities trips are made 30-45% by bicycle, 25-40% by public transport and the rest is cars.
imilk 4y ago
I've never been there and was just making a quick assessment by Google Maps. It is nice that you can bike anywhere, but I'm mostly seeing residential neighborhoods (~10 blocks wide of identical row homes) pretty spaced out around a town center without amenities in their area. So in terms of meeting someone for a coffee/meal/beer/event it looks like you'll have to hop on a bicycle unless you want to go on a 20-30 minute walk past monotonous homes. Which is not that different than suburbs anywhere else.
- Mo3 4y ago
  Of course there's going to be some level of separation between residential areas and other areas - but contrary to, for example the US, where you have to walk for miles or put your life in danger bicycling between a suburb and the city center - the distances are quite negligible and the space in between is friendly towards anything that is not a car. Public transport intervals are measured in minutes, and unlike in the US, it not only connects the suburbs to the city center, but the suburbs to other suburbs as well. Really, everything you want to do is doable and everywhere you want to go is reachable. I miss it. Regarding coffee/meal/beer, there's little shops or cafes or restaurants mixed into the residential areas as well. This video details the fantastic engineering very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP-G-inkkDg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP-G-inkkDg This is specifically about differences between US and Europe but also a great watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8KEoZwMRY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K8KEoZwMRY
  - imilk 4y ago
    I guess so but I'm seeing 1-2 restaurants/bars in sub-neighborhoods that are about 1.5km wide. I'm not saying the city is bad by any means, I'm just saying that it falls very short in what I would hope to be the "future of urban life". Maybe the future of smaller towns or exurbs. But there seems to be a lack of necessary dynamic spaces that change in character throughout the day as people flow in and out that you look for in great urban areas.
    - Mo3 4y ago
      I mean, it is an experiment. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm sorry the BBC is dependent on clickbait titles, but Almere is really nothing too special as I have also mentioned in my original post referring to another users great post here. Some of these concepts have been in place in other cities around the Netherlands for a while, and (imo) work better there. There is not much life going on in Almere, which might explain the lack of density of restaurants or whatever you see. It's really just that Almere is artificial land reclaimed from the sea, so they have quite a lot of space there to experiment with their weird metal houses and green roofs. Almere is a little less dense than other cities nearby.
brailsafe 4y ago
As someone who's lived in cities inspired by Garden City, this looks very British (by their own admission) and extremely suburban. So I gotta agree with the parent's observation. The only difference being small streets which inherently slow traffic, and probably better bike and public transit infrastructure, but everywhere has good public transit if it's tiny now. The garden city movement was a giant compromise between city and rural life, almost by definition. This is one of the most suburban places I've ever seen, it just might be marginally more Dutch of one. There's literally a Dunkin' donuts, Starbucks, and Chanel store all within what looks like a place you drive or bike to to then walk around for a bit and leave, which to me is reminiscent of some places on the outskirts of L.A. Seems like it would probably be better to just ride your bike to Amsterdam if what you want. On the other hand, that's just my observation. What did you get out of living there? Was it the quiet, or the parks? Did you meet people easily?
- Mo3 4y ago
  I was not a particular fan of Almere (please refer to jacquesm’s post on details), however, it being a Dutch city, various general benefits of Dutch city design and engineering also apply there - these are what I am really trying to point at. Almere itself is rather boring and devoid of life. It’s simply artificial land reclaimed from the sea with no history or story to it.
jltsiren 4y ago
Urban areas are not just walkable but walk-centric. They are built under the assumption that most people don't move faster than 4-5 km/h. Places that want to attract people must be close to each other in local centers, or people don't go to them. Bicycles are more suburban than urban. Because they allow people to move flexibly at a relatively high speed, they encourage suburban structure, where things are spread out over a larger area. They are functionally similar to cars, but on a smaller scale.
- ethanbond 4y ago
  Uhh… this seems like an excessively pedantic distinction. What’s the source of truth you’re pulling from here?
  - jltsiren 4y ago
    People may have different definitions for "urban" and "suburban". Regardless of the words used, there is a huge difference between a city designed for walking and a city designed for people using vehicles (cars, public transport, bicycles).
    - calt 4y ago
      Just move bicycles from being grouped with cars to being grouped with walking, and you're correct. Dutch cities are designed for walking and bicycles. It helps that the bicycles are also designed for dutch cities. Upright, comfortable, a bit heavy and slow, and can be locked up for short times without needing to be locked to anything.
      - jltsiren 4y ago
        You can't design a city for both walking and bicycles. You can only make compromises between them. The slow Dutch bicycles are still 2.5x to 3x faster than the average pedestrian, which makes them convenient for distances most people would not consider walkable. If most people are comfortable with using bicycles over such distances, it encourages a more spread out urban structure. People often use bicycles in cities because they are convenient and as fast as or faster than driving a car or using public transport. That is the reason why bicycles should be grouped with other vehicles and not with walking.
Melkman 4y ago
Indeed, Almere is a sleeping city. Many inhabitants moved from Amsterdam to Almere since gentrification has made housing in Amsterdam almost unobtainable for people with a median income. Almere is comfortable enough and you can get by without a car. But the fun still is in Amsterdam only a half an hour train ride away. In the US it would be called a suburb of Amsterdam.

mpol 4y ago

Almere is very walkable, just a bit boring. Cycling is okay too, although it needs a bit of work I think. In regards to cycling, it is not that popular in Almere. Not sure why, it could be that rudimentary, half of the people is upper middle class that is doing everything by car, the other half was born in another country and could more easily find a house in Almere compared to Amsterdam but they don't share the cycling culture much. Edit: And every neighbourhood has supermarkets and small fastfood and bar locations. It is not that different from other dutch cities.

imilk 4y ago
Sure, but it falls a bit short to be in the vision of "future of urban life". There are a sprinkling of commercial businesses in the gray areas of the map outside the city center. But not nearly enough to be considered urban by any means. And most of the areas where people live seem quite far away to be considered "walkable" from the commercial district. I'm sure it's a nice place to live, but this is not the future of urban life. https://imgur.com/a/xgbRE15 https://imgur.com/a/xgbRE15 (I put a 1km marker on the map for reference)