Hacker News Reader

Comment by anhner | Hacker News Reader

And how much infrastructure (schools, kindergardens, medical centers, parks, postal offices, good public transport etc.) do you have around those new developments?

View on HN

I guess none at all. I'm basing my opinion on sweden.

Here all the new developments suck. No parks, no shops, so close to each other that they might as well be underground…

You'd be right. It's sad to hear that it happens in Sweden as well.

Pretty good infrastructure. Most of the new high rises are in the place of old factories that were built in the middle of the city, so they are in a good position, with access to good schools and everything, including public transportation.

If anything, single home units are on the edge of the city and usually don't have any public transportation, and yet people still build a lot there.

I'm not really sure what city in Romania you're talking about, but if it's one of the higher population ones I'll tell you that the "housing in place of factories" is an exception. Most development happens outside of the city centre and has so little thought or care put into it it's almost third country-like.

Zero supporting infrastructure (anything I've mentioned in the previous comment), and the design of the streets sucks as well. You get into a case similar to US suburbia, where if you want to reach an apartment building 10m across from another you need to go around half a mile because no one thought of building pedestrian access from one street to another.

Also most new development isn't "single family homes", it's "10 story cheaply built human concrete farms" because that's the most profitable (and also the mayor is in cahoots with the real estate mafia).

There is a lot more to talk about the corruption of Romanian cities but I'll leave it here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com