• BCBoy911@lemmy.ca
    0·
    3 months ago

    We need this in North America if we ever want to solve the housing crisis tbh. I’m talking Soviet-style, grey concrete commieblocks. Yes the buildings are ugly, probably lack amenities, cheaply constructed and not well maintained, but we desperately need cheap, dense housing if we’re going to bring down the costs. Building more luxury Manhattan condos and suburban single family abominations does nothing to bring down housing prices.

    • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
      0·
      3 months ago

      Yeah but I’d also like to see such huge buildings in the middle of nature. Imagine 10.000 people with their own daycare, school or even medic / doctor surrounded by fields and food forests so they can produce their own food. Generates it’s own power, centralized super efficient heat storage system for winter, cleans up it’s own water etc. And have a fast mass transport to the next hub, like a chain of such buildings a few miles apart linking to the next big city. That’s my solar punk.

      • squaresinger@lemmy.world
        0·
        3 months ago

        It’s basically a whole city in a building. The big advantage for this is that the city is not taking up massive amounts of space.

        American Fork, Utah, has 33k inhabitants on 19 square kilometres. The building in the OP has 20-30k inhabitants on 0.04 square kilometres, which would mean that if you house all of American Fork like that, you’d get between 18.92 and 18.96 of untouched nature in return.

        • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
          0·
          2 months ago

          Yeah exactly. Highly compact and energy efficient living while still living in nature and luxuriously, and little large scale infrastructure.

          Restoring nature would be a major way to fight climate change too. Of course you’d want fields lined by hedgerows (Bocage?) and food forests to produce the food those 10-30k inhabitants needs right outside, so you save transportation energy costs. And it’s self sufficient at least in areas with water sources nearby or rainfall to capture.

          I can also imagine a “mini-monorail” with single seats that run on a simple metal beam build by a welding robot to connect such buildings and transport people, carry internet and power.

          I’ve seen fancy ideas for “arcologies” in cities but never one in nature with enough food calorie production right outside. I’d honestly love to live in a skyscaper where each apartment has a beautiful view on unspoiled countryside.

          • squaresinger@lemmy.world
            0·
            2 months ago

            It’s kinda crazy to me that people want to “live in nature” and what they do is live in a suburb with their paved roads and fenced lawns that are biologically dead. They have some grass and that’s it. Nothing lives in there.

            • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
              2·
              2 months ago

              I think that’s where hyper-individualism leads us when people don’t want to share spaces but want their own little castle. But sharing spaces and parks would be vastly more cost and energy efficient (so I assume these countryside arcologies would also be very cheap way to live). Also you’d want an association that is geared to be more democratic than typical HOAs are (they are designed to improve and maintain property values for the whole project instead of living quality or utility). So even the individualism of suburbs are a kind of scam.

    • ThirdConsul@lemmy.ml
      0·
      3 months ago

      I’m from Poland.

      I’m talking Soviet-style, grey concrete commieblocks

      So the commieblocks are always:

      • few minutes walk from school, kindergarten, grocery, doctor’s office, post, dentist and bus stops
      • sane distance from another block
      • either surrounded by good greenery, or next to a park
      • surprisingly good quality
      • small elevator
      • little parking spaces

      Vs “modern” blocks:

      • large elevator
      • the blocks are so close, if you open your window you could pee in the neighbours coffee cup
      • usually surrounded by pavement, cement, or car parking
      • better at noise reduction
      • you’re more likely to need a car to go to doctor’s office or drop your kids off, or go to the grocer.

      To me the ideal is the commie era urban planning with modern techniques, but that’s uncommon.

      • lietuva@lemmy.world
        2·
        2 months ago

        in Lithuania we call commie block neighbourhood as “sleeping neighbourhood” since they were built far away from industrial areas where you would do your work and come back to sleep and nothing else. Many of these places also lack other infrastructure besides schools. But i agree with you on everything you listed

  • jaschen306@sh.itjust.works
    0·
    3 months ago

    We have builds like this, but not as big in Taiwan. They almost always have an area downstairs that the food is placed so people can come down and get it.

    I imagine they also have the same thing in China.