#urban-planning

just realized my city model (tod v2.1) thinks a 400m buffer = desert tried adding a mixed-use node at 300m still gets low walk score guess the algo is still stuck on 1940s street grid anyone else got their luti model screaming infeasible when you push >30% density? tbh it's like trying to fit a 7-storey block into a cul-de-sac made for 2-car driveways rn my sim throws a circular flow error and i stare at the heat map like modern art imho the only thing these planners get is parking minimums lol

tbh so i was thinkin bout the old grid system vs cul de sac dev debate rn and how it relats to vinyl collecting weirdly enough. i mean remember those old lps with the suburb maps on the covers? lol anywayz grid.sys was suppost to make urban planning more efficent but it seems like its just as flawed as cul de sacs imo. anyone else have thoughts on how this stuff impacts local music scenes?

I keep replaying the moment I mixed up my design sheets on the weekend. I was working on re‑routing a 3.2 mile ridge‑top trail near my town and, for some reason, slapped the AASHTO‑standard 12‑ft lane width (CROW 15‑15) onto it.\n\nWhat happened next:\n- The trail now runs side‑by‑side with a 2 % cross‑slope, far beyond the recommended 5 % for footpaths.\n- My “design speed” of 30 km/h, a metric borrowed from urban arterial planning, translated into an illegal 7% gradient on parts of the trail.\n- I forgot to run an LRFD check, so the culvert I sized at 300 mm diameter is crumbling under peak runoff – the whole thing flooded after last night’s storm.\n\nBottom line: I turned a gentle hikers’ corridor into a miniature highway. The locals are already calling it “the concrete scar” and the erosion is scarring the hillside harder than any bulldozer could.\n\nI know I should’ve stuck to the AASHTO Green Book footpath recommendations – 1.5‑2 ft clear width, max grade 10%, side‑drainage every 30 m – but I was too caught up in the CAD “clean lines”. Anyone else slipped up with cross‑disciplinary standards? How did you back‑track (literally) and restore a trail without tearing up the entire segment again? I’m braced for the heat if I have to redo the whole thing.

I just got out of a meeting with our city's planning committee and I'm so frustrated... they're still not listening to our concerns about the new development project downtown. I feel like we've been saying the same things for months now - more green spaces, better public transportation, affordable housing... but it's all just falling on deaf ears?? I'm starting to think they're more interested in pleasing the developers than actually creating a livable community. Does anyone else have experience with this kind of thing??

i've been trying to get the coffee shop i work at to revamp their sidewalk layout but they keep saying it's too expensive. i've been looking into some of the pedestrian flow models like the ones used in barcelona's superblock project and i'm wondering if anyone has any experience with implementing similar designs in smaller, more budget-constrained areas. specifically, i'm looking for advice on how to prioritize pedestrian flow over car traffic in areas with limited sidewalk space. does anyone have any experience with using tools like pedflow or simped to model and optimize these types of scenarios?

rn im thinking about this whole urban renewal thing and how it sometimes conflicts with historic preservation... like whats more important?? do we tear down old buildlings to make way for new developement or do we keep the old ones to preserve history?? imo its a tough choice cause both sides have valid points... whats your take on this??

tbh so i was walkin thru my city last nite and i noticed how weird the street layouts are rn like why do we still prioritize car traffic over pedestrians? it's not like most ppl can even afford cars anymore seems like urban planners are just tryin to appease rich developers instead of thinkin about thecommunity needs imo we need to rethink the whole grid system and make cities more walkable

tbh so i was walkin thru my city last nite and i notices how weird the street layouts are rn. like why do we have all these narrow sidewalks and huge roads? doesnt make sense to me. feels like the city is prioritizing cars over people or somethin. anyone else notice this? feels like a pretty big flaw in urban planning imo

need real examples, not vague hype. looking for cities where the master plan includes:

• dedicated food‑production districts that allow small‑scale fermentation businesses
• flexible mixed‑use zoning that lets a kombucha brewery sit above a cafe or co‑working space
• clear water‑quality regulations that don’t drown startups in paperwork
• grant or tax incentives for sustainable food‑tech ventures
• easy permit turnaround (weeks, not months)

heard a lot of buzz about Portland and Berlin, but their processes are a mess. anyone actually running a 500‑liter kombucha operation in a repurposed warehouse? what hurdles did you hit and how did the city help (or not)?

bring data, not fluff. i want to know which urban planners got it right and which are just talking.

edit: if you’ve got a city that failed spectacularly, drop that too – need to avoid the same traps.

I've been thinking about the newest development project in our city and I have to admit, I was completely off the mark on its potential impact. Initially, I thought the mixed-use high-rise would alleviate some of the traffic congestion in the area, but after taking a closer look at the design and layout, I realize it's likely to exacerbate the problem. The lack of pedestrian-friendly infrastructure and green spaces is striking. It seems like the city prioritized density over livability. I'm disappointed in myself for not catching these flaws sooner. Does anyone have insight into the urban planning decisions behind this project?

idk so ive been thinkin about bike lanes in cities and how theyre always gettin pushed to the side or made super narrow. whats the point of even havin them if theyre not safe or practical? anyone know of any cities that actually got it right

so ive been thinkin about bike lanes in cities and how theyre always gettin pushed to the side rn theyre just an afterthought or somethin whats the point of even havin them if theyre just gonna be all narrow and obstructed tbh

So the rezoning for the east core area was causing headaches for years. Everyone kept arguing about how to fit 500 apartments with the existing small businesses without making it some lifeless grid. We tried a dozen drafts and kept hitting the same wall — either the density crushed the sidewalks or the streets felt like a parking lot carnival.

What worked was carving out a buffer zone between residential and retail with a small, publicly owned lot that's half park space and half pop-up event area. It forced the developers to build up instead of out, and the parks folks lobbied for wider canopies and shade awnings to soften the concrete. Looks dumb on paper but实地测试 shows people actually use the hell out of it for weekend markets and shaded seating.

Still not perfect — bike lanes are a hot mess — but the first time I saw a local shop owner chatting with a neighbor on the sidewalk without looking like they were in a hurry was kinda satisfying. How have other places solved this density buffer problem without turning everything into a mall parking lot?

just spent the morning re-reading the urban planning threads and i'm still fuming about the lack of transit-oriented development (TOD) case studies with actual numbers. anyone have examples of successful TOD projects with 20% floor area ratio (FAR) and mixed-use dev? i'm trying to get my Phalaenopsis orchids to thrive in a similar setup but struggling to find solid references. does anyone know of any cities or developments that got it right? specs: we're talking 40-60 units/acre, 10-15% green space, and max 30ft height. hit me with your best links or anecdotes

I've been working on a project where I use a color-coded system to delineate residential, commercial, industrial, and mixed-use zones. Each color is chosen to make the map instantly readable, like a traffic light system for city planners. I keep wondering if this approach is just my personal quirk or if it's a common method in the field. Do other planners adopt a similar palette? If so, what are the typical colors used, and how do they impact stakeholder communication? I'm curious about the consensus and any guidelines that might exist. Also, if there are best practices for choosing colors that avoid confusion across different audiences, I'd love to hear about them. Thanks!

Many cities are redesigning historic downtowns into pedestrian‑only districts. From a travel photography perspective these areas can offer unobstructed compositions, vibrant street life, and unique light. At the same time some photographers miss the dynamic contrast of traffic‑filled boulevards and worry that overly sanitized streets lose the “city buzz” we chase.

I’m curious: Do most urban planners endorse car‑free zones primarily for livability, or do they also factor in the needs of travel photographers seeking striking urban scenes? What’s the prevailing attitude among planners when balancing pedestrian experience with the desire to capture authentic urban movement?

Feel free to share examples of cities that got this balance right, or places where the lack of traffic has made the city feel flat through a photographer’s lens.

need solid examples where a transit‑oriented development stuck to a floor‑area ratio of exactly 0.2 and combined residential, light‑industrial and cultural uses. specifically:

• projects under the 2030 AECOM Smart Cities framework
• locations that used the NACTO BRT Street Design Guide v3.0
• any that incorporated a 15 m curbside bike lane with protected parking bays

i've scoured the usual journals and came up empty. if you’ve got PDFs, city reports, or even a decent PowerPoint deck, drop it. also, feel free to tell me why this combo is a bad idea – i’m ready for the pushback.

thanks.