Norwegian Neko

This is an interesting article related to New Urbanism about the housing crisis/price gouging in San Francisco you guys may be interested in reading: SFGate.com

---------------- On 10/20/2003 11:52:53 AM mcwesty2000 wrote: I have been using this idea also, i have named areas, all fairly distinct and unique, with their own neighbourhood centres with library and shops, and most with there own primary (elementary) schools (or private schools). The concept works brilliantly, you have each neighbourhood linked to each other using distributor roads, highways or dual carrageways. A main spine road runs through each neighbourhood which in turn leads to the cul-de-sacs, and streets. This concept i borrowed from the 'New Towns' idea. Industry is separate, and there is a main town centre for primary shops and offices. However the new concept in british planning is to create fairly high density mixed use schemes, schemes that are sustainable or schemes that don't require cars, people use public transport or walk instead. There is a new scheme in Edinburgh like this. Do a search for the 'Quartermile,Edinburgh' project at the former royal infirmary site. ---------------- Actually, this is just the complete OPPOSITE of what "New Urbanism" is for. You just described a typical suburban sprawl design, remniscent of the large Arizona and Los Angeles style "new subdivisions." What New Urbanism is really about, believe it or not, is to design cities and towns like we did in 1920. Put stores close enough so people can walk there. Get people out of their cars. Create a more lively community. Get a variety of people to live together, using government programs and forcing the developers to allow a variety of housing types to coexist. Typical 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's style American subdivisions reinforced class separation by not providing any direct pedestrian access to stores or schools or the rest of the city; no mass transit; and strict zoning laws that would grade-separate housing types: one area for houses costing $241,000 another area for houses costing $243,000 another area for houses costing $245,000 and waaaay back near the freeway, put all the low-rent apartments together in the crappiest area. Why do I know all of this? I'm an architecture major. Oh, and check out some websites: http://www.cnu.org/ -> main New Urbanism website www.newurbanism.org http://www.sprawlwatch.org/ http://www.sierraclub.org/sprawl/ http://www.sprawlcity.org/ Interesting article/opinion: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/pacificnw/2003/0202/cover.html Anyways, this leads to more fundamental questions about the livability of a city. There are reasons "new urbanism" and "transit oriented developments" are becoming more popular and common in the US. Primarily - pollution from cars, time wasted in cars, urban blight (shitty run down areas that everyone avoids), urban renewal, and an effort to create more "livable" communities. Ones with lower crime, more integration, less auto use, prettier places.

---------------- On 10/20/2003 2:18:11 AM Shoe wrote: I have recently been reading up on New Urbanism, and I think it seems pretty cool. I am wondering if this would work well in Sim City, and I'm thinking it could help with commute times as well as other things. For those of you who know about the New Urbanism concepts, have you tried incorporating them into SC4? Well the point of my post is to just get the idea tossed around between some other players who know about New Urbanism and see if it is a possiblity and could help with the cities in the game.---------------- I design almost all of my cities in SC4 around the New Urbanist principles. I like to develop a lot of "town center" areas that have low-density commercial on both sides of a street smack dab in the middle of a residential area. The school and hospital both located centrally add more jobs, so most residents end up working in the shops that form the community. I wanted to take the concept further and include industrial areas, but I haven't played on a map large enough to handle the low density development. While New-Urbanism does tout itself as building higher density than a 60's era suburb, they still primarily consist of single-family unattached dwellings.

All hail DM! He is the Mod God! err, Squad!

"probably too big" ?! Are you insane? It would take 2,000 medium-sized cities just to span the width of the United States if it 2 miles per side!