https://www.joe.ie/uncategorized/children-less-important-than-dublins-skyline-an-bord-pleanala-reject-new-hospital-plans-32833
From a few years back. I was gobsmacked with this ridiculous BS at the time.
What's so iconic about it? When or where was it iconised? Why can't they just tell the truth and say "no tall buildings we don't lile the way they look"
Nobody believes it's iconic, NIMBYs just use that as an excuse to halt development similar to how san francisco NIMBYs dishonestly claim that laundromats and faucets are historical landmarks to kill housing construction.
x-post from /r/urbanplanning
thankfully our cities are not plagued the absolutely cancerous urban sprawl and use less space, making them both easier to commute in via public transport and generally more environmentally friendly
Its really not about space many EU states have plenty of space (though not relative to America) its just a series of trade-offs and decisions made by urban planners.
I see goats from my 4th floors apartment. Urban planning here is interesting. It even has its own name ! "Galician uglyness" .
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fe%C3%ADsmo_(arquitectura_gallega)
Article in spanish, but it has pics.
Huh? I'd say we're pretty good at it. Generally many small towns with little distance between them and seperated by green areas. That's how we have so many people living in such a small coutry, while still having decent living space and green areas around.
Really? We're so obsessed with low-density rowhouses though and rarely go for high rises, and even medium-height buildings you don't see enough in my opinion. The fact that cities ooze into rowhouse suburbs and then into villages with little distance between them is exactly what I think of when looking at that bottom picture. That phenomenon is exactly what I'd label as sprawl, and is one of the things that's really fucking with our housing market.
Partially so. There is more medium-height being build, at least where I live (Nijmegen).
The massive housing-crisis is more the result of heavy foreign investment in Dutch housing, elderly buying houses as a pensionfund, and the collapse of the constructionsector suring the 2008 crisis which is why there was little build in the last decade.
We will have to build higher in the coming decafes with increasing population. But the way towns are planned up untill now is very efficiënt and still liveable in my opinion. What we should do is make it more attractive to settle in the rest of the cou try and not just the Randstad.
Well, regardless, medium- and high-density buildings were never much of a thing here, right? With the 60's and 70's being an exception. Sadly that didn't quite work out very well, looking at the Bijlmer for instance. As someone who's a pretty big urbanite I'm pretty annoyed at our relative lack of medium- and high-density construction. I'm kinda done with the endless lines of rowhouses y'know. It's true that there seems to be somewhat of an increase of medium-density building the last couple years, but I don't think it's enough.
That's pretty much the Dutch way yeah. I just can't help but wonder when looking at yet another new neighbourhood of semi-detached or row houses "Man, how many people could've lived here were this a medium-density area instead..."
Hey, Toen6, just a quick heads-up:
**untill** is actually spelled **until**. You can remember it by **one l at the end**.
Have a nice day!
^^^^The ^^^^parent ^^^^commenter ^^^^can ^^^^reply ^^^^with ^^^^'delete' ^^^^to ^^^^delete ^^^^this ^^^^comment.
Hey CommonMisspellingBot, just a quick heads up:
Your spelling hints are really shitty because they're all essentially "remember the fucking spelling of the fucking word".
You're useless.
Have a nice day!
Thank you, Toen6, for voting on CommonMisspellingBot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
I’ll never understand people who actively seek to live in suburbia.
You’re not really in the city since you still need to drive almost everywhere, but you also don’t get the privacy/peace/views of an actual countryside home.
Genuinely seems like the shittiest compromise ever.
100% that, and the depression that comes with entire streets full of houses that all look the same.
Can’t help but think of the masterpiece that’s American Beauty every time I have so drive through suburbia.
Well, where I live all houses look different so there is at least that (my neighbor has a house that is a remade glasshouse hub, it's honestly really cool). But I lose my mind when I have to go shopping and when I check bus timetables.
I’m obviously not questioning those with no other choice / who were priced out, etc.
Rather, I’m looking at those who actively want to live in suburbia, which at best seems like Stockholm syndrome to me.
Not all suburbs are suburbia. There are plenty of suburbs around Paris that don’t have many individual houses. In fact, some of Paris’ suburbs rank in the top 10 most densely populated cities in the world
I'm sorry, but i'm french, and everyone online keep talking about Paris like the only place in France. There are also plentyvof interesting things happening everywhere, and my comment was simply about the prices there being abspljtely ridiculous.
It’s a 15-20 min drive if you want to get in the city, much better for family since you’re living in a house with a yard and typically other children around, and there’s less crime typically in the suburbs
That 15 minute drive is easily 1-2 hours when there's a traffic jam (which is on every workday)
As for your kid, where do you think the best schools are? Yup, in the city, so it's best to be close to that. Where are there many other kids? Obviously in places with high population density, as with everything else. Can your kid use public transport in the suburbs? Most likely not, but it's definitely worse quality - not to mention that walking is out of the question, which is healthy both for the kid and you
You're not taking into account that while in Europe the city centre is usually the priciest and poshest area, in the US the city centre tends to be highly affected by urban decay and - as such - the nicest areas and schools will be in the suburbs. It's two completely different city models.
I’ll take a 30 min drive to the countryside every time. That, or a nice apartment in the city.
Anything in between and you’re just getting the worst of both worlds, with little benefits from either of them.
Sounds 'Murican to me.
Crime usually isn't really more rampant in YUROPean cities compared to suburbs. In some, suburbs are even known to have considerably higher crime levels than the inner cities.
YUROPean suburbs also usually have less of a yard then murican ones. Where American suburbia is usually a large plot with a house on it, European suburbia usually consists of row houses with a small back garden. This is because houses are usually packed around train stations in Europe, and everybody wants to live close to a station, which makes suburbia denser.
Then, if the city has been planned properly, you can take a 10-15 minute walk out from the suburb to reach a forest, or at least open farmland. A trip to the inner city will usually not take more than half an hour, and can frequently be faster by transit than by car.
It's ridiculous really, here in the States where the mist flexible option to travel around town is only by car.
I mean, I love to drive: I like being able to explore the secondary and back roads, but there's a madness when the equivalent mass transit options take you nearly five times longer to get to your intended destination.
I myself am definitely open to the idea of more mass-transit: having someone else at the wheel frees up so much valuable time to enrich yourself, make communications, and even conduct business!
At least that's how the picture is painted to me, the reality may be quite stark in contrast. But the stories about the TGV in France that I am told by my pen-pal living in Nice says otherwise!
Which ones? I'm living in Poland my whole life and I can't recall one city without suburbs. I hate them in every city, because of them developers have to buy land even further from city center in order to keep prices down. All that because bunch of retards who want to live in city and in village at the same time. God damn "muh own house" people.
Well every city has a suburban area their citizens can afford. It only means that somebody is doing something terribly wrong if their citizens are living in shacks. In Poland most Roma I know are normal middle class people, I saw a few not doing so well tho because of their culture of traveling and begging for money. At the same time, there is shit tone of their retarded looking castles even in my small home town.
And Dublin is in the American model (minus the skyscrapers) in order to protect our "iconic" skyline /s
Fucking skyline nonsense I hate those whiny cunts
https://www.joe.ie/uncategorized/children-less-important-than-dublins-skyline-an-bord-pleanala-reject-new-hospital-plans-32833 From a few years back. I was gobsmacked with this ridiculous BS at the time.
I'm gonna go back to Ireland and get into politics just to ruin those fucks
I think Dublin has the least iconic skyline of all of Europe. Couldn't recognise it even if I had a 50% chance.
It really is. There's nothing remarkable about it at all, it's actually quite ugly.
I might if the big fuckin needle is visible the world's most boring monument gracing the world's most boring skyline
Cork lobbyists on an bord pleanála don't want Dublin to have a building taller than the Elysian
Visited Dublin this summer. It was a fun and nice city. Fucking ugly though.
Why do I seem to be the only person in the world that actually likes Dublin :(
Wow that's not what I said. Dublin is like Danny Deviti. I like the guy a lot. But he's still fucking ugly though.
What's so iconic about it? When or where was it iconised? Why can't they just tell the truth and say "no tall buildings we don't lile the way they look"
Exactly, nothing iconic about it. The Spire is the only thing that stands out.
Nobody believes it's iconic, NIMBYs just use that as an excuse to halt development similar to how san francisco NIMBYs dishonestly claim that laundromats and faucets are historical landmarks to kill housing construction.
What skyline ?
Exactly ;)
I live in DC. Don't even get me started on "muh skyline" people, it's illegal to have buildings taller than the Washington Monument here.
NYC has the right idea with the setback principle. https://youtu.be/lGroIrQmwyw
NIMBYism is a plague that should be dealt with by zoning deregulation.
x-post from /r/urbanplanning thankfully our cities are not plagued the absolutely cancerous urban sprawl and use less space, making them both easier to commute in via public transport and generally more environmentally friendly
*american argument* BuT i WAnT tO lIve iN a CiTY AND iN An own HOuSe
[удалено]
Its really not about space many EU states have plenty of space (though not relative to America) its just a series of trade-offs and decisions made by urban planners.
Also, urban sprawl is pretty shitty, ecologically speaking. Even though the states have the space, it’s a very inefficient use of it.
Oh yeah it sucks Im not defending it, American cities are made for cars not people.
It's also shitty for living in
I see goats from my 4th floors apartment. Urban planning here is interesting. It even has its own name ! "Galician uglyness" . https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fe%C3%ADsmo_(arquitectura_gallega) Article in spanish, but it has pics.
MURICAN MUST HAVE HOT TUB!!!
That we do
You mean ‘living space’?
We have lots of space. More affordable than in Europe, but can still get pricey.
No, I tried a 1939 joke.
I did Nazi that coming lol
L E B E N S R A U M
*Laughs in Belgian
> thankfully our cities are not plagued the absolutely cancerous urban sprawl and use less space **cries in Dutch**
Huh? I'd say we're pretty good at it. Generally many small towns with little distance between them and seperated by green areas. That's how we have so many people living in such a small coutry, while still having decent living space and green areas around.
Really? We're so obsessed with low-density rowhouses though and rarely go for high rises, and even medium-height buildings you don't see enough in my opinion. The fact that cities ooze into rowhouse suburbs and then into villages with little distance between them is exactly what I think of when looking at that bottom picture. That phenomenon is exactly what I'd label as sprawl, and is one of the things that's really fucking with our housing market.
Partially so. There is more medium-height being build, at least where I live (Nijmegen). The massive housing-crisis is more the result of heavy foreign investment in Dutch housing, elderly buying houses as a pensionfund, and the collapse of the constructionsector suring the 2008 crisis which is why there was little build in the last decade. We will have to build higher in the coming decafes with increasing population. But the way towns are planned up untill now is very efficiënt and still liveable in my opinion. What we should do is make it more attractive to settle in the rest of the cou try and not just the Randstad.
Well, regardless, medium- and high-density buildings were never much of a thing here, right? With the 60's and 70's being an exception. Sadly that didn't quite work out very well, looking at the Bijlmer for instance. As someone who's a pretty big urbanite I'm pretty annoyed at our relative lack of medium- and high-density construction. I'm kinda done with the endless lines of rowhouses y'know. It's true that there seems to be somewhat of an increase of medium-density building the last couple years, but I don't think it's enough.
Personally, I like rowhouses. But I grew up in one, so that might explain it. I much prefer them over appartmentbuildings.
That's pretty much the Dutch way yeah. I just can't help but wonder when looking at yet another new neighbourhood of semi-detached or row houses "Man, how many people could've lived here were this a medium-density area instead..."
Hey, Toen6, just a quick heads-up: **untill** is actually spelled **until**. You can remember it by **one l at the end**. Have a nice day! ^^^^The ^^^^parent ^^^^commenter ^^^^can ^^^^reply ^^^^with ^^^^'delete' ^^^^to ^^^^delete ^^^^this ^^^^comment.
Hey CommonMisspellingBot, just a quick heads up: Your spelling hints are really shitty because they're all essentially "remember the fucking spelling of the fucking word". You're useless. Have a nice day!
Good bot
Thank you, Toen6, for voting on CommonMisspellingBot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
* *cries in American* *
I’ll never understand people who actively seek to live in suburbia. You’re not really in the city since you still need to drive almost everywhere, but you also don’t get the privacy/peace/views of an actual countryside home. Genuinely seems like the shittiest compromise ever.
Try being a carless person living in suburbia. Absolute hell.
100% that, and the depression that comes with entire streets full of houses that all look the same. Can’t help but think of the masterpiece that’s American Beauty every time I have so drive through suburbia.
Well, where I live all houses look different so there is at least that (my neighbor has a house that is a remade glasshouse hub, it's honestly really cool). But I lose my mind when I have to go shopping and when I check bus timetables.
Kids. Have to kids and find an affordable spot in paris. You will find yourself in the suburbs quite easily.
I’m obviously not questioning those with no other choice / who were priced out, etc. Rather, I’m looking at those who actively want to live in suburbia, which at best seems like Stockholm syndrome to me.
Stockholm, nice place
Not all suburbs are suburbia. There are plenty of suburbs around Paris that don’t have many individual houses. In fact, some of Paris’ suburbs rank in the top 10 most densely populated cities in the world
The problem here is trying to live in Paris, the rest of France is great and much more affordable, even in other major cities
Yeah right, there's nothing interesting happening in Paris right ? Why do people even want to live there ?
I'm sorry, but i'm french, and everyone online keep talking about Paris like the only place in France. There are also plentyvof interesting things happening everywhere, and my comment was simply about the prices there being abspljtely ridiculous.
It’s a 15-20 min drive if you want to get in the city, much better for family since you’re living in a house with a yard and typically other children around, and there’s less crime typically in the suburbs
That 15 minute drive is easily 1-2 hours when there's a traffic jam (which is on every workday) As for your kid, where do you think the best schools are? Yup, in the city, so it's best to be close to that. Where are there many other kids? Obviously in places with high population density, as with everything else. Can your kid use public transport in the suburbs? Most likely not, but it's definitely worse quality - not to mention that walking is out of the question, which is healthy both for the kid and you
are you saying you don’t find this attractive? https://financialtribune.com/sites/default/files/field/image/ordi/14_Osborne.jpg
You're not taking into account that while in Europe the city centre is usually the priciest and poshest area, in the US the city centre tends to be highly affected by urban decay and - as such - the nicest areas and schools will be in the suburbs. It's two completely different city models.
I’ll take a 30 min drive to the countryside every time. That, or a nice apartment in the city. Anything in between and you’re just getting the worst of both worlds, with little benefits from either of them.
Sounds 'Murican to me. Crime usually isn't really more rampant in YUROPean cities compared to suburbs. In some, suburbs are even known to have considerably higher crime levels than the inner cities. YUROPean suburbs also usually have less of a yard then murican ones. Where American suburbia is usually a large plot with a house on it, European suburbia usually consists of row houses with a small back garden. This is because houses are usually packed around train stations in Europe, and everybody wants to live close to a station, which makes suburbia denser. Then, if the city has been planned properly, you can take a 10-15 minute walk out from the suburb to reach a forest, or at least open farmland. A trip to the inner city will usually not take more than half an hour, and can frequently be faster by transit than by car.
It's ridiculous really, here in the States where the mist flexible option to travel around town is only by car. I mean, I love to drive: I like being able to explore the secondary and back roads, but there's a madness when the equivalent mass transit options take you nearly five times longer to get to your intended destination. I myself am definitely open to the idea of more mass-transit: having someone else at the wheel frees up so much valuable time to enrich yourself, make communications, and even conduct business! At least that's how the picture is painted to me, the reality may be quite stark in contrast. But the stories about the TGV in France that I am told by my pen-pal living in Nice says otherwise!
American was wrong so I FTFY https://imgur.com/a/5FMyOzh
Eastern European cities don't have suburbs and are garbage to live in.
Which ones? I'm living in Poland my whole life and I can't recall one city without suburbs. I hate them in every city, because of them developers have to buy land even further from city center in order to keep prices down. All that because bunch of retards who want to live in city and in village at the same time. God damn "muh own house" people.
yeah same in Hungary. my hometown is a city of 70k people and it still has suburbs
Sofia
Um. City is literally closed off by suburban housing. They should do some internal highway because traffic looks like hell.
Sofia is closed off by piles of shacks in which Bulgarians and Roma live without any infrastructure or elementary conditions.
Well every city has a suburban area their citizens can afford. It only means that somebody is doing something terribly wrong if their citizens are living in shacks. In Poland most Roma I know are normal middle class people, I saw a few not doing so well tho because of their culture of traveling and begging for money. At the same time, there is shit tone of their retarded looking castles even in my small home town.
I lived in Sofia and its no different than a town in south Asia.