11 ms·

> No, it makes zero sense to build a city along a line. Why. That we are building cities in non-linear fashion because we dont have enough flat, contiguous la

> No, it makes zero sense to build a city along a line. Why. That we are building cities in non-linear fashion because we dont have enough flat, contiguous land in most of the world does not make it the best paradigm. Moreover, there were historic communities that were built in such linear fashion. Ancient Egypt itself, was a gigantic line around the Nile river where the Nile played the role of the infrastructure.

majewsky 4y ago
> because we dont have enough flat, contiguous land in most of the world But even in the plentiful places where we do, cities grow in two dimensions. > Ancient Egypt itself, was a gigantic line around the Nile river where the Nile played the role of the infrastructure. This is indeed a good example, though it proves the opposite of your point. The Egyptians spread in a linear fashion because (and only because) the land far away from the Nile was pretty much uninhabitable (except with a nomadic lifestyle).
- unity1001 4y ago
  > But even in the plentiful places where we do, cities grow in two dimensions. We don't have plentiful places to be able to construct any linear cities. The majority of the world's habitable zones do not permit such construction. You would eventually have to oblige with what geography and geology imposes on you even after a few kilometers. Saudi Arabia has immense desert stretches that are uniform and that are fit for this purpose. What would prohibit it would be the desert environment not being conducive to living. But an efficient planning and infrastructure like they are likely doing would make it possible. > This is indeed a good example, though it proves the opposite of your point. No, you disproved your point: > The Egyptians spread in a linear fashion because (and only because) the land far away from the Nile was pretty much uninhabitable (except with a nomadic lifestyle). That is precisely the reason why Egyptians lived in linear fashion, and thats also the reason why their entire civilization never had infrastructure problems and it was able to undertake construction projects like the pyramids.The reason for having to urbanize in such a linear outline does not negate its merits. Moreover - the majority of the world's civilizations and urbanization has developed along the rivers. That many rivers do not follow a straight line and turns in curvers does not mean that they are not line-like in their behavior. Even when the land far away from the rivers were arable and habitable, the urbanization did not spread too far away from the river. The infrastructure that the river provides is way too efficient to give up. Even if it is only for providing water for consumption and for irrigation. Actually, it is so even today - the majority of world's urbanization and mega cities and even industries are still spread along the rivers.

majewsky 4y ago

> because we dont have enough flat, contiguous land in most of the world But even in the plentiful places where we do, cities grow in two dimensions. > Ancient Egypt itself, was a gigantic line around the Nile river where the Nile played the role of the infrastructure. This is indeed a good example, though it proves the opposite of your point. The Egyptians spread in a linear fashion because (and only because) the land far away from the Nile was pretty much uninhabitable (except with a nomadic lifestyle).

unity1001 4y ago
> But even in the plentiful places where we do, cities grow in two dimensions. We don't have plentiful places to be able to construct any linear cities. The majority of the world's habitable zones do not permit such construction. You would eventually have to oblige with what geography and geology imposes on you even after a few kilometers. Saudi Arabia has immense desert stretches that are uniform and that are fit for this purpose. What would prohibit it would be the desert environment not being conducive to living. But an efficient planning and infrastructure like they are likely doing would make it possible. > This is indeed a good example, though it proves the opposite of your point. No, you disproved your point: > The Egyptians spread in a linear fashion because (and only because) the land far away from the Nile was pretty much uninhabitable (except with a nomadic lifestyle). That is precisely the reason why Egyptians lived in linear fashion, and thats also the reason why their entire civilization never had infrastructure problems and it was able to undertake construction projects like the pyramids.The reason for having to urbanize in such a linear outline does not negate its merits. Moreover - the majority of the world's civilizations and urbanization has developed along the rivers. That many rivers do not follow a straight line and turns in curvers does not mean that they are not line-like in their behavior. Even when the land far away from the rivers were arable and habitable, the urbanization did not spread too far away from the river. The infrastructure that the river provides is way too efficient to give up. Even if it is only for providing water for consumption and for irrigation. Actually, it is so even today - the majority of world's urbanization and mega cities and even industries are still spread along the rivers.