[Zyx]

Just relocated.

Any concerns with Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government should be put in this thread.

If there are proposed bills or proposed matters, take it to me, I'll review it (or craft it), send it to my party and then make a consultation thread. With luck, after approval, the Parliamentary Clerk will create a bill from there and it can be voted on my Parliament en masse.

I am the thread leader, so discussion is concentrated on me and you agree to be quiet on an issue or even leave my thread (office) when I say as much.

Currently, Zagadka is working on crafting a bill for our locomotive systems. I'm guessing that he will discuss it foremost with SLD, his party, then create a consultation thread on it: or I may first take it to SN/RF, my party, for pre-consultation review.

Bring your issues. Non-MPs can come, but only for bill proposals or raising issues--I'm not going to 'debate' with a non-MP. No political gain from that. Just state your case and leave. If it's good, I'll invite you back for 'debate.'

[Zyx]

I am looking to construct a "Durkheim's Institute of Rehabilitation"

Anyone know how to draft such a bill?

Essentially, it is a substitute for prison, wherein those who are sentenced to repay society but are deemed sane and non-dangerous can be apprenticed to a local professional who would get the repayment from some amount of years of service. The person is free to move about, but must follow a contract with the professional. The contract, also, must benefit the repayer. In this way, this person can feel integrated in society, and the idea is that they'd be less likely to commit crimes if they are.

Dunno. This doesn't seem good since it seems so much like African slavery, but let the ideas pour in.

[ingliz]

This is not your concern but Vladimir's, it is an IA matter as he deals with prisons and prisoner rehabilitation.

[Zyx]

Alright.

I don't much care for stadiums--too much of a distraction.

As for staying on task, I've a funny Orwellian idea.

[Vladimir]

Are you responsible for housing or is it another ministry ?

PS you did not illustrate your ministry, office etc. Are we supposed to just imagine what you seat of power is ?

[Zyx]

Just relocated.

Any concerns with Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government should be put in this thread.

^ ^ ^

I've many powers.

I just don't understand them.

Worse, I can't even write a bill.

[Vladimir]

I think you immediate concern should be the redevelopment of our vast peri-urban slums. I advise you use the high-rise micro-district model, as promised in our manifesto.

[Zyx]

Vladimir, can you help me?

I'm one of those old-time Democrats save I'm from the illiterate underclass. I can not write in legalese, worse, I only know how to throw money at problems.

I was considering purchasing PBC and expanding its reach. But I don't see how I can make it into a bill.

What's the bill form of micro-districts?

[Vladimir]

You don't have write in legalise, this isn't all formal you know. Just because Ingliz is spamming the forum with endless legalise doesn't mean that you should too
Just write outlines and stuff, for example
-urban zoning laws
-regulations for zones
-programmes to be applied to slum zones (regeneration - housing, transport etc. Slums generally don't have infrastructure at all, so a pretty wide scope for you there)
-urban planning laws for the districts that will replace slums
-financing policies, how you will deal with re-housing slum dwellers and how you will share costs with them

The key is to split your ideas into sections and then work to deepen each section

[ingliz]

Why use high rise anything, why not keep communities low rise. The high rise experiment failed, why would you condemn our workers to live in shit?

[Dr House]

What's wrong with high-rise apartments?

[ingliz]

Vertical slums with no sense of community; old ladies with shopping stranded 20 floors down when the lifts don't work; the lifts stinking of shit and urine, the perfect place for a mugging or worse when they are; the stairs hangouts for drug dealers and teenage criminal gangs, etc, etc, etc.

[Dr House]

Great point.

[Zyx]

Ok, I can make parks, right? *hint on sense of community*

And, I can keep prices of tennis courts low. Correct?

Workers Park . . ..

[ingliz]

Why not just knock every other row of terraces down and refurbish what's left, that would open things up in the worst areas and leave room for green space, trees and grass.

Use vacant brownfield sites to build modern high density low rise housing.

Build sheltered housing, schools, polyclinics, community centres etc

Extend mass transit into the area

Improve street lighting and furniture

[Vladimir]

No, modern cities desperately need compact high-rise complexes. Here in Russia we have the most efficient city transits due to the space freed up by high rises, Moscow is the 3rd densest city in the world with (still) no gridlock and maximum an hours' journey from one end to the other. Needless to say the abundance of parks, green yards and parking spaces accessible everywhere, as well as fingersnap access to any urban object from a school to a cinema, kids don't spend more than 10 minutes walking to school and old ladies can reach shops and hospitals easily.

Basically,
-enormous savings of time and money in transit
-efficient and cheap services
-affordable to our target residents and to us

Don't give me stuff about "loss of community", I live on the 5th floor and I know everyone on my floor and most other people, also the immensely short travelling times make all my main friends/relatives reachable within 0.5 hours max. The vast green communal areas with playgrounds mean a very much improved community for the elder and the younger.
The general visibility across urban space makes antisocial behaviour less likely, but that's provided there's good policing.

Yes elevators may fail and stink but that's what mechanics and cleaners are for, my elevator hasn't broken once since I can remember and although there's no cleaner, the people clean it themselves.

In short, I would NEVER change a (well-planned) high-rise city for a shitty European one stuck in the 19th century, and I strongly advise Zyx not to reconstruct the 19th century in the ROP, if that’s what you do, you might as well keep the slums as they are.

Micro-district (high-rise complex) based cities, for reference:





A typical microdistrict covers the area of 10–60 hectares (30–160 acres), up to but not exceeding 80 hectares (200 acres) in some cases, and comprise residential dwellings (usually multi-story apartment buildings) and public service buildings. As a general rule, major motor roads, greenways, and natural obstacles serve as boundaries between microdistricts, allowing an overall reduction in city road construction and maintenance costs and emphasizing public transportation. Major motor roads or through streets are not to cross microdistricts' territories. The entrances to a microdistrict's territory can to be located no further than 300 meters (1000 ft) apart.

Standards also regulate the accessibility of the public service buildings (excluding schools and pre-school facilities) by imposing a 500-meter (1,500–foot) limit as the farthest distance from any residential dwelling. Typical public service structures include secondary schools, pre-school establishments (usually combined kindergarten and nursery), grocery stores, personal service shops, cafeterias, clubs, playgrounds, and building maintenance offices, as well as a number of specialized shops. The exact number of buildings of each type depends on the distance requirement and the microdistrict's population density and is determined by means of certain per capita standards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microdistrict

This is what you should be working towards Zyx, a scientifically planned city aimed at maximum comfort and lowest costs to please the former slum dwellers, not some 19th century shithole like Ingliz wants

[Brio]

I think why some people may be adverse to high rises was that in the US, high rise "projects" were tried in low income areas and failed miserably. There is now a movement in the US to use 2-3 story town house complexes for low income areas and it has met with a fair bit of success.

Whether or not these high rise projects failed because they were high rises or not I do not know, but to at least many Americans, the image of low income high rise buildings is not a good one.

[Vladimir]

What was their failure though ?

[Zyx]

Vladimir, that's very attractive. My praises to the ideologue behind it.

I'll see about working on this.

ingliz's bad experiences can be legislated against--plenty of parks and community events can keep the people together and safe.

[ingliz]

No, modern cities desperately need compact high-rise complexes

Let's think this through logically and it is easy to see why high-rise compounds problems in deprived areas of high crime and low income.

Low-rise's big advantage over high-rise is the sprawl; high-rise stacks the streets one on top of another.

There are many ways to get where you want to go in a low-rise development, you can avoid trouble; in a high-rise there are only two.

Just because you build new housing doesn't mean you get rid of the criminal elements. These, mostly teenage, criminal gangs are not stupid. In the worst estates in the UK where even the police are wary of patrolling, they simply take over the lifts and stairs effectively taking over the building - High-rise is hell, forget it.

By the end of filling the homes with the tenants, problems started to emerge. The Estate had a reputation of crime, insecurity and poor services by 1973. The problem of water penetration from the roof, leakages, pest infestations, electrical faults, lack of amenities, unemployment, litter, graffiti, drug problems, poor policing and isolation emerged. The GP surgery which was located in one of the shops had wound up. The small community hall was decaying. Security doors on the tower block were not in working condition. The deck walkways were flooding, limiting accessibility. There was a lack of prospects for residents, as many of the residents were poor, and the Estate residents were increasingly from minority ethnic groups. Many residents lived in constant fear of robbery, vandalism and violence. The allocations refusal rate was between 53-55% and the Estate had the highest number of tenants applying for transfer and twice the turnover of tenants in the borough by 1976. The then Department of Environment studies of the Estate, after 1976 as part of nationwide difficult-to-let Housing Estates investigation, concluded that the Estate should be demolished because of the generally poor condition of the Estate due to design faults, lack of amenities, and social problems of inhuman proportions. These and later developments contributed to earn the Estate its unwanted reputation as the ‘nightmare Estate’ and later ‘no-go-area’. Relations between black tenants and management became largely confrontational. Between 1979 and 1982 there were clashes and disorders.

Low-rise is also easier to police without giving the residents the impression they are living in a police state.

Mass transit means it is just as quick to get to work or the citycentre.

Modern low-rise building design ensures that the population density of the two systems is the same. It just means the empty poorly lit expanses of grass surrounding a high-rise are replaced by smaller community gardens, on a more human scale, in a low-rise development.