High Density Doesn't Mean Skyscrapers | Jane Jacobs Death & Life of American Cities (4/4)

There's a place for suburban living, but when it comes to creating a thriving urban neighborhood, DENSITY is key. So what are some of the reasons people are opposed to density, and what can be done about it? This is the final part (4/4) of the Jane Jacobs series exploring her 4 conditions for diverse urban areas. Please check out the previous 3 videos if you haven't already.
I make these videos because these are topics I wonder about, so if you have more insight or disagree with me, leave it in the comments!

[@samwisegamgee6532]

I live in Paris, in the 18th arrondissement which has a density of almost 32000 inhabitants per square kilometer with no building taller than 8 levels. There is only one thing that really makes that density problematic : Too many cars. Coming from suburbia because people living there has no really convenient public transportation. Paris has a very efficient public transport system but too many of its suburbia don’t. So we have a huge congestion problem. If we offer correct public transportation to people living in the suburbs, high density downtown can be very pleasant.

[@fatemahhesham3045]

I am really thankful for this book analysis! it helps me a lot with my current studies! Your voice over- explanations and drawings are really amazing and very understandable. wish you the best of luck!

[@redhidinghood9337]

Skyscrapers arent overcrowding either. They use land in the most efficient way. You dont need to have skyscrapers packed one next to another like in Hong Kong or some other city thats populated extremely densely. You can have skyscrapers spaced nicely apart with green/natural spaces or smaller/ mid size buildings in between.

[@grt1977]

If you space out the skyscrapers you have Brasilia. This urban model has already proved devastating for the life of the cities. Hong Kong's skyscrapers make more sense, because they respond to a very extreme and specific need. They can also make sense in the first line of a wide avenue full of cars or in a mass transit node (Tokyo). The fact is that, as a general rule, the urban model that has proven to be the best for city life, balancing all needs, is the classic continental European "model".

[@matthewboyd8689]

Anyone who's played City skylines knows if you want to have a bigger population you must use transit or cycling Anyone who's tried that with low density knows that it's a bad idea to not have higher density Cities with density make money Cities without become Ponzi schemes funded by the government (real life urban sprawl for maintenance)

[@bjornnordling269]

great series 👷🏼

[@saturo_nipon]

i like this voice, so watching again

[@bentoney9682]

Really need to read this book

[@optimicities]

Yes, I recommend it! It's thick, but it's easy to pick and choose chapters to read :)

[@punchkicker3837]

@@optimicities WHO is the narrator? What's her name?

[@peterslegers6121]

A bunch of people might be a better symbol of "high density". Those people don't need to be in the same place at the same time. Local dwellers, workers, students and tourists can share a space by using different "time slots". In a big medieaval city like 0:55 Rothenburg ob der Tauber, with only 11k inhabitants, tourism can be a dominant economic factor and a welcome support of its economy. Vevey, with 19k inhabitants in a wider urban area (including Montreux) of 82k, can easily accomodate tourists on its lakeside boulevard to give their local venues a boost. But it can get out of hand, with 18 M tourists in Amsterdam city centre each year, causing problems. They compete for living space, because Airbnb pays more rent. And there are too many foreigners who get loud, drunken, stoned and act like animals in the street or next door. That´s not good for sleep or business. Amsterdam would benefit from their tourists discovering the loads of other tourist destinations in the Netherlands. Too much Disney Land in your city, disturbs city life, but it´s fine if things are in balance.

[@optimicities]

All my friends told me to visit Amsterdam. When I did, I was a bit underwhelmed, because I had a preconceived image of a romantic, clean Amsterdam. The reality was closer to what you mentioned (partially my fault for staying so close to the tourist area, bars and red light district). I did however, love the other cities like Den Haag and Utrecht. I wonder how countries/ states/ cities can distribute their tourism more. I'm in Honolulu right now and there is one resort district, where probably 90% of tourists stay. If there were more inns, hotels, bnbs distributed around the island, tourists could support local businesses and neighborhoods like Downtown (which is dead and unsafe at night). Instead, tourists are concentrated in one area, supporting designer labels and chain stores. Locals rarely venture into the resort district unless they work there.

[@anubizz3]

@@optimicities Thats why you don't worship a city before even going there , even Jason from Not Just Bike blown away by Swiss city's compare to Amsterdam not sure why is that considering he claim already visit 60 country... I also fell into the same trap... I am so amaze by Swiss and tell my best friend to go there they tell me Swiss is nice but not as nice as New Zealand, I hardly believe that until I personally go there. Alot of Urbanist worship Amsterdam like they already crack the car dependency problem and yet Netherlands have 588 cars per 1000 compare to Singapore 140 and Hong kong 100.

[@optimicities]

@@anubizz3 True, there are pros and cons to every city. Guess you have to find one that matches your lifestyle. Interesting to hear that about New Zealand. I've never been but it's on my list!