Why do we live in such ugly houses?

[PaleoEuropean]

Because people live ugly lives trying to get away from their true selves and nature.

[Celestia]

Because people live ugly lives trying to get away from their true selves and nature.

Deep. Preach it

[The Lawspeaker]

We need to bring back the human scale and natural and traditional materials such as wood and brick as they are our friends who sustained us for centuries. Let us return to our friends.



Let us return to us having pride in our public spaces and attention to detail given to each building - both private and public:

[KirillMazur]

We have way too much of this here:

It seems to me that such structures may be relevant in small amounts - solely to dilute the aesthetic uniformity.
And as a memory of not the best of times.

[The Lawspeaker]

It seems to me that such structures may be relevant in small amounts - solely to dilute the aesthetic uniformity.

I think that taller buildings should only be build around the neighbourhood centres (with a shopping centre - most normal shops should just be at street level dispersed throughout the community through) clinic, schools and then some apartment blocks but they should be build in a more traditional style as well. And of course: there should be ample green space. A bit like this but with schools, church and a clinic as well and in a more traditionalist style. Parking space should, of course, be underground, guarded and connected to the shops and the street level. This leaves more room for parks.

[The Lawspeaker]

And of course: it's time to declare war on straight lines again. Broad streets and straight roads only leads to speeding and that's something nobody is waiting for in a neighbourhood that's full of playing children. So perhaps it's time to return to the 1970s concept of the "bloemkoolwijk" ("cauliflower neighbourhood" named after the way in which the streets and courtyards branch out from the main street):

So it would be better to have a 30km/h speeding limit, lots of speed retractable speed bumps (retractable because of the emergency services) and lots of corners in a playful street pattern. Like this:











Combine this with ample green space (playgrounds !), a strong neighbourhood community centre and traditional architecture and you'll be going places. As for what used to be there before: leave as many of the old buildings, ditches or trees (if a forest) into the neighbourhood as possible and where possible the wet areas should either remain connected or new connections should be made and new mature vegetation and trees brought in. The neighbourhood should not destroy or supplant the local area, it should integrate it. I would actually go as far as to adapt the architecture to what was already present and the street names should remind people of the old situation (and preferably written in local dialect).

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

We need to bring back the human scale and natural and traditional materials such as wood and brick as they are our friends who sustained us for centuries. Let us return to our friends.






Let us return to us having pride in our public spaces and attention to detail given to each building - both private and public:

[The Lawspeaker]

^ What the hell ?

[The Lawspeaker]

Come to think of it - there are more modern and cost-effective versions of the right architecture as well:



And a certain playfulness prevailed until the late 1980s:



But unfortunately - now we have American-influenced VINEX neighbourhoods blighting the landscape:

Cheap and nasty (in quality - not in prices: those are through the roof) with barely any parks or real gardens and with piss poor public transport connections:

[KirillMazur]

And of course: it's time to declare war on straight lines again. Broad streets and straight roads only leads to speeding and that's something nobody is waiting for in a neighbourhood that's full of playing children. So perhaps it's time to return to the 1970s concept of the "bloemkoolwijk" ("cauliflower neighbourhood" named after the way in which the streets and courtyards branch out from the main street):

So it would be better to have a 30km/h speeding limit, lots of speed retractable speed bumps (retractable because of the emergency services) and lots of corners in a playful street pattern.

Combine this with ample green space (playgrounds !), a strong neighbourhood community centre and traditional architecture and you'll be going places. As for what used to be there before: leave as many of the old buildings, ditches or trees (if a forest) into the neighbourhood as possible and where possible the wet areas should either remain connected or new connections should be made and new mature vegetation and trees brought in. The neighbourhood should not destroy or supplant the local area, it should integrate it. I would actually go as far as to adapt the architecture to what was already present and the street names should remind people of the old situation (and preferably written in local dialect).

Conclusion - even if you can not afford "architectural excesses", then you should avoid infill development, building blocks should be comprehensive and well-planned in advance.
The shape of the buildings, the number of floors, the distance between houses, the number of parking places, green spaces, social and recreational facilities, proximity to the workplace, etc. - all this must be calculated in advance for maximum comfort of future residents.
A “pure” market cannot solve this problem; state protectionism is necessary (to a certain extent) here.