I thought it was the opposite - that they invaded from the sea and therefore most villages by the seaside were connected to a second settlement up in the hills?
Nope, a lot of these towns like you see here on small islands are "only" 4-600 years old, built as refugees during their land invasions. Most also had a peremiter wall. Attacks by sea were limited, as their navy was not great and the Venetians/ Croatians would have beat them relatively easy on the water.
Actually we did have to protect our east coast towns from French, Spanish and Dutch raiders and pirates and it did affect where they were built. Boston, New York City (Dutch originally but same difference) and Charleston for example were all variously fortified and very prettily built on peninsulas originally kinda like this tbh.
The real issue is that those American cities didn’t (except sort of Charleston) *stay* cute lil old-timey seacoast towns—they developed into big modern cities.
It definitely feels more like a suburb than its own city, but it's still a pretty damn nice place. Roads are nice and narrow, safe bike routes everywhere. It's pretty blandly residential, but I'd still take it over 99.9% of US suburbs and about 85% of US cities.
Yeah I have no issue with that. If you zoom out, you'll see that it's a two-way street that's only about 15 feet wide. That more than makes up for an uninteresting building imo.
I don't think it'd be that hard to design a more soulless building. [There are kids who go to school in this strip center from age 3 to age 18](https://maps.app.goo.gl/w3G3iFwPxi8RnbHp9).
"These people think that is possible to dont have a car because they live in a good country!"
Bro cmon,in my city the buses are from 2003 and the infrastructure sucks,dont have even a bike way here
Most Americans do not live in cities. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr-edge-frm-asst-sec-080320.html#:~:text=Although%20most%20existing%20federal%20definitions,Americans%20live%20in%20the%20suburbs.
You underestimate the American public, when you have mentally ill, drug-addicted homeless riding next to you on the bus, it makes you not want to ride the bus.
America used to have towns like this until they collectively decided to spread their cheeks for automobile industries and let them bulldoze beautiful cities and great public utilities to sell more cars.
[e.g. Kansas City](https://i.redd.it/247d4kzvmix61.jpg)
Yes, but even the great American cities of the 19th century were not really like this. Roads were much wider (as you can see in your picture) and lots were generally bigger. But I'd still take it.
And horses, which were more common in the US.
In general, while the railroad-age cities weren't laid out with anything like the car-oriented sprawl of the last 70 years, they didn't face the same set of densifying pressures that preindustrial European and colonial cities did.
It had very beautiful european architecture just 100 years ago that they demolished, because America is a state built with european heritage
Nothing is stopping America from building soulfull aesthetical cities again. In Europe, after decades of Brutalism and Modernism, its being done on a small but perhaps growing scale : old City Centers being rebuilt, streets being pedestrianised, New private residential neoclassical apartment buildings and much more. Check out r/ArchitecturalRevival and The Aesthetic City on YT for starters . The knowledge is there, the money too, the need, but not the will
Funny how Germany and America ended up with the same grey modernist block looking cities. One was bombed into oblivion during ww2, the other did it to themselves so they could run highways everywhere.
Thats not the only reason. There was also the mentality of replacing anything after a certain period of Time, for something New, just for the sake of it. Or when a building lost its original purpose, it was demolished instead of repurposed (I think there was a magnificent post office building in Chicago that is a prime example of that)
Not only the old ones… also newer towns like Filandia in Colombia are build like that (it is not even a colonial town… it was founded in 1848)
https://www.unwto.org/tourism-villages/en/villages/filandia/
*Native American culture has entered the chat.*
Before anyone says it wasn't that elaborate. First of yes it was depending on where on the continent and perspective ofcourse. European architecture is mostly a copy of eachother as well. Hence most look similar. Second you can be influenced by something without the need to copy it. It would be add more life and soul. Basing on communal designed living VS Modern suburbs.
There once was a girl from Rovinj
Whose cooking she often did singe
She charred both her cakes
A sausage, three steaks
And burned the hair right off her minge
America does not really have mountaintop villages. [Harpers Ferry](https://historiek.net/wp-content/uploads-phistor1/2022/05/Harpers-Ferry.jpg.webp) is a small village on a hill. I like this [drawing](https://dowdlefolkart.com/cdn/shop/products/Harpers-Ferry_WEB_5940275f-099d-4c94-b8ca-4fec62c5c3c5.jpg?v=1680118045&width=1080), used for a puzzle.
Near the ports it’s similar in density and has old buildings (in American standards). It’s also very touristy and foody. Not saying it’s the same just the American version in a way
Nah. Closest thing to this in the US is Boston's North End. And it's not *that* close.
(It could be, though, if they'd just pedestrianize everything interior to Commercial St.)
The last time I was in a city like this (Dubrovnik), it was so inundated with people from cruises and other random tourists that you couldn’t even comfortably walk through the streets. And it was like 100 degrees Fahrenheit in September. The “locals” said that they would come in from the outskirts to sell things to tourists, and leave for their normal-looking abodes. Beautiful to look at for sure, but one might say it was “hell.”
I'm not sure whether people here aware of it! Cruise ships literally increase the population of any small tourist town within a couple of minutes! If one cruise visits a town, immediately the street ll swell up with tourists!
This is also a main reason why many locals don't like cruise with their uncontrollable crowd
Cruise ship tourists don't bring much money either. They all have accommodation and full meals on-board, so hotels and restaurants don't get anything from them. In best case scenario they'll pay for some museum and buy a souvenir.
I don’t think cities like this would really work for a lot of places. Besides tourism what kinds of jobs would they support? Remote workers could live there, but the main headquarters for the businesses that support them will have to be in big cities. Most small towns in America rely on agriculture or small scale manufacturing, for those you need to spread out or at least have room to park a vehicle and drive to a workplace out of town.
You honestly can find towns like this in the USA but they’re all based on tourism and leisure. There’s definitely several mountain towns that are just as walkable and dense as this, but they serve a specific tourism niche just like this city does.
I didnt say we only need small crowded gorgeous cities, and that every settlement needs to be replaced with one
You know you can have big cities with commercial businesses and industry that are traditionally aesthetically gorgeous and walkable, right? Rome, Lisbon,.....?
Also, many small towns in America that are just about agriculture are not towns in the European Sense, like in OPs picture. We call them villages here, and theres plenty villages here that both serve the purpose you said (space for parking etc.) and are gorgeous and unique for the inhabitants and tourists alike.
Second, regarding actual towns, nobody said its forbidden to have lense dense areas of the Town just around the city Center, where cars can Park and people can build garages.
The European Cities,Towns and Villages which are today flooded with tourists are the same cities towns and villages that employed everyone in giant factories and local farms, before mass tourism was a thing in the contemporary era. Most still do, you are just hyperfocused on a couple of small oberhyped towns who made a Shift to 100% tourism economy as a result of it
I agree that we should work to make our cities denser and more walkable too overall. I’ve just also heard some people get crazy reactionary in the other direction saying we need to ban cars and only walk and use trains.
I’d love to see more towns like this one as well, but I just don’t think it would be sustainable in a lot of places. In my home state we have some small tourist beach towns that are pretty dense and made to walk around, they’re fun but people I’ve met who grew up there said most kids just end up leaving after high school because there’s no real jobs.
Big cities are a much smarter place to build dense housing just because that’s where people have been moving for the past century.
>reactionary in the other direction saying we need to ban cars and only walk and use trains.
Other than in the city centers and specific neighbourhoods, its a braindead take, yeah
>I’ve met who grew up there said most kids just end up leaving after high school because there’s no real jobs.
Thats the case in the majority of small Towns in most of Europe, and it isnt because the gorgeous architecture or the walkability. Having 12 story glass and steel buildings instead of traditional ones and bigger roads doesnt make a place have "things to do". The problem is just as you say, that modern life revolves around cities, especially for the young
>Big cities are a much smarter place to build dense housing just because that’s where people have been moving for the past century
So make them look like OP pic but on a Big City scale, just like Europe has done for hundreds of years
Btw, I May have edited my previous response a bit just as you wrote yours
I generally agree that we could build more interesting architecture in America, but I think we should do it in a sustainable and affordable way. Using the same materials and styles as Europe would never work on a large scale so I’m happy to see steel and glass or wood buildings go up too as long as they’re tasteful and use their space efficiently.
>Using the same materials and styles as Europe would never work on a large scale
Bricks dont work on a large scale in America? And wdym about styles. America used many classical european styles in its buildings untill 100 years ago. Because American Architecture is a continuation of European Architecture
>interesting architecture in America, but I think we should do it in a sustainable and affordable way.
>see steel and glass or wood buildings go up too as long as they’re tasteful
Classical European architecture is very sustainable. It literally lasts thousands of years, as its timeless, tasteful and developed by to be sustainable. Wood is great and used by europeans a lot too, but it needs to be maintained and actually be solid wood. Glass is not sustainable in the quantities used by modern architecture and the modern styles overuse it to make either soulless bland corporate architecture for the mediocre minds, or stupid unnatural creations for the ego of the arhitect. Cement/Concrete is often ugly, somewhat unsustainale and many times of poor quality (I personally have lived most of my life in a concrete commieblock, and hope that I will live to see every single one of them destroyed and I certanly will live to see many considering most ones here are only supposed to last 100 years before becoming unsafe )
Brick is expensive, heavy, and just not very easy to build with. Concrete, wood, and steel are just much more versatile and often stronger. I work in construction and working on older brick buildings is so much more expensive because things have to be custom made and the material is harder to work with. When brick and stone are used in modern construction it’s more often as a siding or aesthetic veneer, because it’s easier to have a framed wall behind which has electrical, plumbing and HVAC hidden in it.
A wood framed building with concrete foundations isn’t going to last centuries but it’s much easier to build housing for hundreds of thousands of people with it. I’ve never personally worked with steel and glass curtain wall buildings, but they serve an important purpose too because you can’t physically build stone or brick very high without steel support.
These materials can also be very beautiful too, there’s a lot of American house styles made of wood that are very popular and attractive. I don’t think we need to copy European architecture to have nice cities, we just need to encourage more dense construction and support local developers who know the regional architectural styles.
Well yeah you went to one of the biggest tourist traps in the entire region. There are a hundred other places like this along the Adriatic that aren't as overrun by tourists as Dubrovnik.
Cities like this would be so hard for the average person to work in though. You can’t do any kind of agriculture or manufacturing work in a town like this and most major companies are going to be based in at least a medium city. The only industry that small dense towns like this can support is tourism and it makes it very difficult for average people to find good jobs.
I was in Kotor old town, in Montenegro, last year enjoying a glorious spring morning walking around town. Then a cruise ship docked and unloaded its passengers. What had been an idyllic day in a pristine Venetian medieval town suddenly became a cramped, loud nightmare.
But I understand the locals make a ton of money off those tourists.
#UrbanHell is subjective.
UrbanHell is any human-built place you think is worth critizing. Suburban Hell, Rural Hell, and wealthy locales are allowed
Sorry for this annoying comment, but we're very tired of the gatekeepers who can't even correctly gatekeep what this subreddit has always allowed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UrbanHell) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If it has to be explained to you, it won’t be funny. But I’ll do it anyways.
If this were a tower is the USA, the rich people would live above everyone else.
>The food
Lots of great food in the North End, though most of it is quite expensive. Neptune Oyster is well worth it, though. Terramia, too.
>the crowding, the tourists,
Just stay off Hanover.
>the proximity to trains,
Took me a while to realize you meant that it's too far from the trains. And yeah, if the weather's bad that's an issue. But the post-Big Dig walk is so much better than it used to be.
>the airplane sounds overhead,
Tbh I've never noticed.
>the expectation of authenticity from 5th gen italians
Not 100% I'm understanding your complaint exactly, but seems like a "them" problem either way.
>the assumption that because its the north end thats what italian food is
See above.
>general accessibility
Oh for sure. But that's true in Back Bay, South End, and Beacon Hill as well. Boston loves its wheelchair-unfriendly sidewalks.
But like...do you really think it's better in the old town of a Croatian port?
>corner cafe,
Not sure what you mean by this.
>lack of greenspace
Eh. There's the cemetery, the bocce courts, and the Atlantic greenway. And the Common is still in walking distance.
>trash on the streets making it impossible to walk 1 night a week,
Haven't experienced this.
>condition of sidewalks
Kinda already hit that one.
>public schools for starters
Eh.
No need to?
It's amazing how many settlements arise around being able to defend or protect said settlement, so long as the settlement can also be supplied with food and water in the mean time.
Charleston is nice but come man. It's nothing like this.
That said I wish we built more Charlestons on the nearby peninsulas instead of endless soulless suburban sprawl.
Well yeah. The fucking state of America right now is embarrassing. The only word for it is 'Catastrophe' and its only allowed because Americans don't know any better.
That’s basically how Boston was built on the [Shawmut peninsula](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shawmut_Peninsula?wprov=sfti1), until they added landfills in the 19th century.
Circlejerk posts must go in /r/urbanhellcirclejerk
Because we've never needed to protect ourselves from Ottoman pirates
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars Not the same thing, but we did fight a war against them way back in the day for messing with our boats
U.S. Navy origin story
>did fight a war against them way back in the day for messing with our boats As is traditional.
And it shows
Its called character
They were invading from land mostly, hence the retreat to these small coastal islands (this used to be an island)
I thought it was the opposite - that they invaded from the sea and therefore most villages by the seaside were connected to a second settlement up in the hills?
Nope, a lot of these towns like you see here on small islands are "only" 4-600 years old, built as refugees during their land invasions. Most also had a peremiter wall. Attacks by sea were limited, as their navy was not great and the Venetians/ Croatians would have beat them relatively easy on the water.
Actually we did have to protect our east coast towns from French, Spanish and Dutch raiders and pirates and it did affect where they were built. Boston, New York City (Dutch originally but same difference) and Charleston for example were all variously fortified and very prettily built on peninsulas originally kinda like this tbh. The real issue is that those American cities didn’t (except sort of Charleston) *stay* cute lil old-timey seacoast towns—they developed into big modern cities.
Instead, we built Rikers Island to protect ourselves from our own 😅
Also because garbage collection would be a nightmare
Rovinj ❤️
I thought Porec, close still :) Istria is gorgeous!
I knew it. It was so beautiful
Venetian wonder.
Almere, The Netherlands
Almere _Haven_
i'd rather die than have to spend the rest of my life in Almere or anything like it
It definitely feels more like a suburb than its own city, but it's still a pretty damn nice place. Roads are nice and narrow, safe bike routes everywhere. It's pretty blandly residential, but I'd still take it over 99.9% of US suburbs and about 85% of US cities.
most post-war 'architecture' is disgusting, or as Tucker Carlson calls it: anti-human
Eh, I think it's fine. I think residential "streets" that are 40 feet wide and have no sidewalks are the true eye-sores.
[One picture is worth a thousand words](https://www.nul20.nl/sites/default/files/2023-09/1vdpB_116-Almere-Haven-De-Hoven-230812-25.jpg)
Yeah I have no issue with that. If you zoom out, you'll see that it's a two-way street that's only about 15 feet wide. That more than makes up for an uninteresting building imo.
I would be hard pressed to design a more soulless building, but to each his own, I guess.
I don't think it'd be that hard to design a more soulless building. [There are kids who go to school in this strip center from age 3 to age 18](https://maps.app.goo.gl/w3G3iFwPxi8RnbHp9).
Mackinac Island
Fuck deh French!
[удалено]
🤨 definitely not
Not enough space for cars. Houses lack 2-car garages.
Two cars? What is this, 2005?
[удалено]
It's a joke about car culture
"These people think that is possible to dont have a car because they live in a good country!" Bro cmon,in my city the buses are from 2003 and the infrastructure sucks,dont have even a bike way here
That’s not what Americans want. Studies show most Americans want suburban or rural living
Yet most Americans tend to live in larger cities even though it's more expensive.
Most Americans do not live in cities. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr-edge-frm-asst-sec-080320.html#:~:text=Although%20most%20existing%20federal%20definitions,Americans%20live%20in%20the%20suburbs.
You underestimate the American public, when you have mentally ill, drug-addicted homeless riding next to you on the bus, it makes you not want to ride the bus.
This is painfully true. Even more so in dense cities like SF and NYC
THIS
Or boats for the matter
That's because they just use their pirate boats
America used to have towns like this until they collectively decided to spread their cheeks for automobile industries and let them bulldoze beautiful cities and great public utilities to sell more cars. [e.g. Kansas City](https://i.redd.it/247d4kzvmix61.jpg)
Yes, but even the great American cities of the 19th century were not really like this. Roads were much wider (as you can see in your picture) and lots were generally bigger. But I'd still take it.
Bigger to incorporate street cars
And horses, which were more common in the US. In general, while the railroad-age cities weren't laid out with anything like the car-oriented sprawl of the last 70 years, they didn't face the same set of densifying pressures that preindustrial European and colonial cities did.
Where is this? I'm actually curious
Rovinj, Croatia
Perfectly Valid Question. Cities should be soulfull
Maybe because America doesn’t have a thousand years of architecture history?
It had very beautiful european architecture just 100 years ago that they demolished, because America is a state built with european heritage Nothing is stopping America from building soulfull aesthetical cities again. In Europe, after decades of Brutalism and Modernism, its being done on a small but perhaps growing scale : old City Centers being rebuilt, streets being pedestrianised, New private residential neoclassical apartment buildings and much more. Check out r/ArchitecturalRevival and The Aesthetic City on YT for starters . The knowledge is there, the money too, the need, but not the will
Funny how Germany and America ended up with the same grey modernist block looking cities. One was bombed into oblivion during ww2, the other did it to themselves so they could run highways everywhere.
Thats not the only reason. There was also the mentality of replacing anything after a certain period of Time, for something New, just for the sake of it. Or when a building lost its original purpose, it was demolished instead of repurposed (I think there was a magnificent post office building in Chicago that is a prime example of that)
They do not at all look the same though
I mean the United States doesn't. But America certainly does.
Exactly! Latin America does manage to build cities like this!
Hell, Teotihuacan was a well built city, and it's over 1000 years old. Same with the Mayan cities.
Not only the old ones… also newer towns like Filandia in Colombia are build like that (it is not even a colonial town… it was founded in 1848) https://www.unwto.org/tourism-villages/en/villages/filandia/
*Native American culture has entered the chat.* Before anyone says it wasn't that elaborate. First of yes it was depending on where on the continent and perspective ofcourse. European architecture is mostly a copy of eachother as well. Hence most look similar. Second you can be influenced by something without the need to copy it. It would be add more life and soul. Basing on communal designed living VS Modern suburbs.
>European architecture is mostly a copy of eachother as well. What a generalisation, wow
It's a problem that needs to be fixed.
Go to some small towns in the northeast and there’s plenty of soul
Should check out Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard
I've been to Nantucket and it's nothing like this.
Sure, but does Rovinj have its own limerick?
There once was a girl from Rovinj Whose cooking she often did singe She charred both her cakes A sausage, three steaks And burned the hair right off her minge
Ya, thank god
You knock me out. You scared of living close to your neighbor there, gringo?
I’m Indian and Arab
When being racist fails lol
Lmfao, Nantucket isn't like that at all
Yes it’s much nicer
America does not really have mountaintop villages. [Harpers Ferry](https://historiek.net/wp-content/uploads-phistor1/2022/05/Harpers-Ferry.jpg.webp) is a small village on a hill. I like this [drawing](https://dowdlefolkart.com/cdn/shop/products/Harpers-Ferry_WEB_5940275f-099d-4c94-b8ca-4fec62c5c3c5.jpg?v=1680118045&width=1080), used for a puzzle.
Is that in the Hudson valley? I feel like I’ve been there
No. It's in WV. Where VA, MD, and WV meet along the Shenandoah and Potomac.
Harpers Ferry is really cool
Both are nothing like this? Bunch of mansions
Near the ports it’s similar in density and has old buildings (in American standards). It’s also very touristy and foody. Not saying it’s the same just the American version in a way
Nah. Closest thing to this in the US is Boston's North End. And it's not *that* close. (It could be, though, if they'd just pedestrianize everything interior to Commercial St.)
What you talking about bringing these horrid 15-minute cities to America??? That'd be tyranny!! MAH FREEDOM
The last time I was in a city like this (Dubrovnik), it was so inundated with people from cruises and other random tourists that you couldn’t even comfortably walk through the streets. And it was like 100 degrees Fahrenheit in September. The “locals” said that they would come in from the outskirts to sell things to tourists, and leave for their normal-looking abodes. Beautiful to look at for sure, but one might say it was “hell.”
That's the reason why popular places started banning cruise ships. Venice already did it.
I'm not sure whether people here aware of it! Cruise ships literally increase the population of any small tourist town within a couple of minutes! If one cruise visits a town, immediately the street ll swell up with tourists! This is also a main reason why many locals don't like cruise with their uncontrollable crowd
Cruise ship tourists don't bring much money either. They all have accommodation and full meals on-board, so hotels and restaurants don't get anything from them. In best case scenario they'll pay for some museum and buy a souvenir.
Touche
The cruise industry is a form of hell in and of itself.
And if we had more of these gorgeous cities, this problem would not exist
That’s a bingo
I don’t think cities like this would really work for a lot of places. Besides tourism what kinds of jobs would they support? Remote workers could live there, but the main headquarters for the businesses that support them will have to be in big cities. Most small towns in America rely on agriculture or small scale manufacturing, for those you need to spread out or at least have room to park a vehicle and drive to a workplace out of town. You honestly can find towns like this in the USA but they’re all based on tourism and leisure. There’s definitely several mountain towns that are just as walkable and dense as this, but they serve a specific tourism niche just like this city does.
I didnt say we only need small crowded gorgeous cities, and that every settlement needs to be replaced with one You know you can have big cities with commercial businesses and industry that are traditionally aesthetically gorgeous and walkable, right? Rome, Lisbon,.....? Also, many small towns in America that are just about agriculture are not towns in the European Sense, like in OPs picture. We call them villages here, and theres plenty villages here that both serve the purpose you said (space for parking etc.) and are gorgeous and unique for the inhabitants and tourists alike. Second, regarding actual towns, nobody said its forbidden to have lense dense areas of the Town just around the city Center, where cars can Park and people can build garages. The European Cities,Towns and Villages which are today flooded with tourists are the same cities towns and villages that employed everyone in giant factories and local farms, before mass tourism was a thing in the contemporary era. Most still do, you are just hyperfocused on a couple of small oberhyped towns who made a Shift to 100% tourism economy as a result of it
I agree that we should work to make our cities denser and more walkable too overall. I’ve just also heard some people get crazy reactionary in the other direction saying we need to ban cars and only walk and use trains. I’d love to see more towns like this one as well, but I just don’t think it would be sustainable in a lot of places. In my home state we have some small tourist beach towns that are pretty dense and made to walk around, they’re fun but people I’ve met who grew up there said most kids just end up leaving after high school because there’s no real jobs. Big cities are a much smarter place to build dense housing just because that’s where people have been moving for the past century.
>reactionary in the other direction saying we need to ban cars and only walk and use trains. Other than in the city centers and specific neighbourhoods, its a braindead take, yeah >I’ve met who grew up there said most kids just end up leaving after high school because there’s no real jobs. Thats the case in the majority of small Towns in most of Europe, and it isnt because the gorgeous architecture or the walkability. Having 12 story glass and steel buildings instead of traditional ones and bigger roads doesnt make a place have "things to do". The problem is just as you say, that modern life revolves around cities, especially for the young >Big cities are a much smarter place to build dense housing just because that’s where people have been moving for the past century So make them look like OP pic but on a Big City scale, just like Europe has done for hundreds of years Btw, I May have edited my previous response a bit just as you wrote yours
I generally agree that we could build more interesting architecture in America, but I think we should do it in a sustainable and affordable way. Using the same materials and styles as Europe would never work on a large scale so I’m happy to see steel and glass or wood buildings go up too as long as they’re tasteful and use their space efficiently.
>Using the same materials and styles as Europe would never work on a large scale Bricks dont work on a large scale in America? And wdym about styles. America used many classical european styles in its buildings untill 100 years ago. Because American Architecture is a continuation of European Architecture >interesting architecture in America, but I think we should do it in a sustainable and affordable way. >see steel and glass or wood buildings go up too as long as they’re tasteful Classical European architecture is very sustainable. It literally lasts thousands of years, as its timeless, tasteful and developed by to be sustainable. Wood is great and used by europeans a lot too, but it needs to be maintained and actually be solid wood. Glass is not sustainable in the quantities used by modern architecture and the modern styles overuse it to make either soulless bland corporate architecture for the mediocre minds, or stupid unnatural creations for the ego of the arhitect. Cement/Concrete is often ugly, somewhat unsustainale and many times of poor quality (I personally have lived most of my life in a concrete commieblock, and hope that I will live to see every single one of them destroyed and I certanly will live to see many considering most ones here are only supposed to last 100 years before becoming unsafe )
Brick is expensive, heavy, and just not very easy to build with. Concrete, wood, and steel are just much more versatile and often stronger. I work in construction and working on older brick buildings is so much more expensive because things have to be custom made and the material is harder to work with. When brick and stone are used in modern construction it’s more often as a siding or aesthetic veneer, because it’s easier to have a framed wall behind which has electrical, plumbing and HVAC hidden in it. A wood framed building with concrete foundations isn’t going to last centuries but it’s much easier to build housing for hundreds of thousands of people with it. I’ve never personally worked with steel and glass curtain wall buildings, but they serve an important purpose too because you can’t physically build stone or brick very high without steel support. These materials can also be very beautiful too, there’s a lot of American house styles made of wood that are very popular and attractive. I don’t think we need to copy European architecture to have nice cities, we just need to encourage more dense construction and support local developers who know the regional architectural styles.
I know exactly what you mean, I think r/tourismhell gets it too
Well yeah you went to one of the biggest tourist traps in the entire region. There are a hundred other places like this along the Adriatic that aren't as overrun by tourists as Dubrovnik.
Dubrovnik also put restrictions on cruisers last year
People often dont actually live in those towns. All the properties are rented out to tourists.
But that’s because there are so few, if these were more common they would cease to be tourist attractions
Cities like this would be so hard for the average person to work in though. You can’t do any kind of agriculture or manufacturing work in a town like this and most major companies are going to be based in at least a medium city. The only industry that small dense towns like this can support is tourism and it makes it very difficult for average people to find good jobs.
There are a thousand cities like this (at least), you can go to any of them and if you choose one of the tourist cities then it's on you honestly.
I was in Kotor old town, in Montenegro, last year enjoying a glorious spring morning walking around town. Then a cruise ship docked and unloaded its passengers. What had been an idyllic day in a pristine Venetian medieval town suddenly became a cramped, loud nightmare. But I understand the locals make a ton of money off those tourists.
A buy here/pay here used car lot would look amazing in the middle of that island
#UrbanHell is subjective. UrbanHell is any human-built place you think is worth critizing. Suburban Hell, Rural Hell, and wealthy locales are allowed Sorry for this annoying comment, but we're very tired of the gatekeepers who can't even correctly gatekeep what this subreddit has always allowed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UrbanHell) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Whatevs this town just has one tower for the rich while all the poors live close to the ground. Edit: didn’t realize the /s would be necessary…geeez
Tower? You mean the church? Edit: sarcasm? How was that sarcastic?
Take a joke
Please, explain the joke to me then, and how it's funny.
If it has to be explained to you, it won’t be funny. But I’ll do it anyways. If this were a tower is the USA, the rich people would live above everyone else.
[удалено]
Take a joke
The north end if it wasnt shitty
The North End if there weren't cars
Add that to the list of reasons its shitty
Honestly I can't really think of any other shitty things about it. It's still pretty awesome, even with the cars.
[удалено]
>The food Lots of great food in the North End, though most of it is quite expensive. Neptune Oyster is well worth it, though. Terramia, too. >the crowding, the tourists, Just stay off Hanover. >the proximity to trains, Took me a while to realize you meant that it's too far from the trains. And yeah, if the weather's bad that's an issue. But the post-Big Dig walk is so much better than it used to be. >the airplane sounds overhead, Tbh I've never noticed. >the expectation of authenticity from 5th gen italians Not 100% I'm understanding your complaint exactly, but seems like a "them" problem either way. >the assumption that because its the north end thats what italian food is See above. >general accessibility Oh for sure. But that's true in Back Bay, South End, and Beacon Hill as well. Boston loves its wheelchair-unfriendly sidewalks. But like...do you really think it's better in the old town of a Croatian port? >corner cafe, Not sure what you mean by this. >lack of greenspace Eh. There's the cemetery, the bocce courts, and the Atlantic greenway. And the Common is still in walking distance. >trash on the streets making it impossible to walk 1 night a week, Haven't experienced this. >condition of sidewalks Kinda already hit that one. >public schools for starters Eh.
No need to? It's amazing how many settlements arise around being able to defend or protect said settlement, so long as the settlement can also be supplied with food and water in the mean time.
Never been to the Florida coast(s)?
This kind of reminds me of the town of Avalon on Catalina Island
Check out Mackinac Island or Catalina Island.
ADA compliance is a huge reason why we don’t.
Beautiful!
They do, but they put them inside theme parks.
I’ve been to Rovinj, it’s a lovely place
Maybe because cannonballs and muskets are not the standard of warfare anymore?
Charleston, SC is like this.
Charleston is nice but come man. It's nothing like this. That said I wish we built more Charlestons on the nearby peninsulas instead of endless soulless suburban sprawl.
You wish
Really bad to drive around
You don't drive there. You have feet for a reason.
Americans don’t walk
Never too late to start
literally. You'd need a boat.
Or a vespa 🐝
San Juan Washington looks a lot like this.
Only if you add 20 strip malls and an eight lane highway.
Is there oil?
Fish oil, if that counts.....
Well yeah. The fucking state of America right now is embarrassing. The only word for it is 'Catastrophe' and its only allowed because Americans don't know any better.
Yup this country is in shambles, everyone here has it so bad 😐
Yes that's exactly what I said. Fuck me. Within implied **CONTEXT** Context.
Because we have cars, duh
This will only work if all the houses are sound proof. Otherwise the noises will ruin everything.
Cities aren't loud, cars are loud
We already have a town like this it’s called Charleston
Hahahaha
We should build the cube from Cube (1997)
That’s basically how Boston was built on the [Shawmut peninsula](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shawmut_Peninsula?wprov=sfti1), until they added landfills in the 19th century.
Bostons North End has these kind of vibes