Query post i do want answers however

Architecture has always been through history good at creating major buildings. In today’s world of megacities and populations in the millions, who is there to address the space creation for the average man and his family?

Government gets involved, deciding to build monstrous apartment complexes. Yet in these plans it is forgotten to include green spaces, areas for children and apartments that have all services functioning as they should. Decisions are made to build these monolithic buildings without discussions with the people they want to inhabit them, as to their real needs and their sense of belonging and well being.

The private sector has also been building and taking over land, housing and apartments,
and profit has taken over from what spaces are really necessary for the everyday human to be comfortable, and have a sense of community in tandem with affordability. 

Maybe a new formula in architecture and building will be a simplification of what is to built, delivering spaces in a manner where money can be recouped and at the same time giving humans a positive existence.  This in no means is a simple formulation, as economic, political and social pressures raise their heads.

It is time to rethink the whole developmental processes of creating architecture and buildings that can bridge the public and private domains, and deliver the optimal living spaces.

LEVENSTAD — Beyond the Ordinary

What if we started thinking radically about ordinary city life?

THINK RADICALLY. CHANGE PRACTICALLY.

We often talk about improving our cities through small, familiar changes: repairing cycle paths, adding greenery, creating more comfortable public spaces or improving public transport.

These improvements are important. But I believe there is another question worth asking:

What if we also challenged the way we organise everyday life itself?

My name is Timur Chernyshev, and I am developing an independent urban initiative called LEVENSTAD — Beyond the Ordinary.

The project initially focuses on Leidschendam-Voorburg in the Netherlands, but many of its ideas could be explored in other European towns and cities.

LEVENSTAD consists of two connected parts.

1. FUNCTIONAL CITY — Making Everyday Life Better

The first part focuses on practical improvements that people could experience in their daily lives.

Better cycling infrastructure. Even in a country famous for cycling, some paths are uneven or uncomfortable. I would like to begin by examining specific locations, including Laan van Nieuw Oosteinde in Voorburg, and exploring realistic improvements.

A brighter public transport identity. Imagine buses and trams with a distinctive blue-and-green design, bringing more colour and personality to everyday streets while keeping passenger information clear and accessible.

A more welcoming Voorburg railway station area. Rather than being only a place to catch a train, the station surroundings could become a small green social hub, with comfortable seating, cafés and occasional community activities.

Public spaces without an obligation to spend money. More places where people can sit, meet friends, relax or simply enjoy being outside without having to buy something.

Come In. Take a Break from the Rain. Imagine a short pedestrian street with a transparent canopy, greenery and benches. When it rains, people could continue walking, talking or resting without needing to enter a shop or café.

None of these ideas requires turning a Dutch town into a futuristic metropolis. I want to preserve its familiar architecture and human scale while making everyday life more enjoyable.

2. REVOLUTIONARY CITY — Rethinking the Rules

The second part is more experimental.

The City on Its Own Rhythm. Why should so many people start working at the same time? Where possible, employers could experiment with flexible starting hours, giving people greater control over their daily routines.

LEVENMARKT — A Supermarket Without a Conventional Boss. Could employees organise shifts, share decisions and rotate coordination responsibilities while maintaining proper wages, safety standards and reliable service?

FLIRT CLUB — A Different Way to Meet. A small, welcoming social venue near a railway station, with quiet music, comfortable seating, free entry and opportunities to meet new people naturally. Not a nightclub or dating app, but a relaxed place for real conversations, with respect and consent at its centre.

ANOTHER LIFE. A programme where people can try experiences outside their usual routines: presenting a radio show, learning to DJ, improvisational theatre, cooking with strangers or taking part in a simulated city council meeting.

These ideas are not intended to be imposed on anyone. They are invitations to experiment, question familiar habits and discover alternatives.

3. Why Combine Practical and Radical Ideas?

This is the most important part of LEVENSTAD.

Imagine proposing a small improvement to a cycle path. Some people might respond: “Why bother? It works well enough.”

Now imagine first having a serious conversation about a supermarket without a traditional boss, a city with more flexible working hours or entirely new ways for people to meet.

Suddenly, repairing a cycle path or changing the colours of a tram may seem much less complicated.

My central idea is that discussing radical possibilities can help us overcome resistance to ordinary improvements.

Not because every radical proposal will work, but because imagining alternatives can change how we perceive what is possible.

Of course, bold ideas can also create scepticism. That is why LEVENSTAD combines imagination with practical questions about costs, safety, accessibility, responsibilities and realistic pilot projects.

4. What Happens Next?

I am developing LEVENSTAD independently and would like to connect with urban planners, designers, researchers, students and residents who are interested in discussing these ideas.

I am not looking for unconditional agreement. Constructive criticism, alternative perspectives and practical suggestions are especially welcome.

I would love to hear your thoughts:

• Which of these ideas would you most like to see tested in your city?
• Do you think radical ideas can make smaller urban improvements easier to accept?
• What would you change or add?

A city does not have to become unrecognisable to become more interesting. Sometimes we simply need to stop treating the familiar as the only possibility.

LEVENSTAD — Beyond the Ordinary

Think Radically. Change Practically.

#UrbanPlanning #UrbanDesign #LeidschendamVoorburg #Netherlands #PublicSpace #SocialInnovation #LEVENSTAD

I’m talking about anything from the history behind why a city is laid out a certain way, why a particular building looks the way it does, how a street or public space came to be, or some random but fascinating fact about how our built environment works.

Maybe it’s a historical decision that shaped an entire city, an unexpected reason behind a design feature, or something you noticed that made you see an ordinary place differently.

It doesn’t have to be technical or related to your specific profession. I’m just looking for those interesting little stories and insights that make you look at the world around you differently.

What’s something you learned that made you think, “That’s actually so cool, I never knew that!”?

Hey everyone! I made a short documentary about relocating from my car-dependent hometown in Canada to Manchester and how experiencing a more walkable city changed my perspective on urban design in North American cities.

My film explores car dependency, walkability, and how cities can reinvent themselves. Would love to hear what you guys think!

Hey NYC Transit Riders! (If you are not in or a NYC native no worries! You can answer the questions with your thoughts in general!)

I'm a CUNY Brooklyn College student double majoring in Economics and Anthropology. This project focuses on how the subway environment, like official MTA signs, commercial ads, social messaging, and police presence, shapes the daily commuting experiences of everyday New Yorkers.

Whether you ride the train in the Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, Manhattan, or Staten Island, I'd loveeeee your input!

Take the 2-minute survey here: Survey
Of course, this survey is 100% anonymous & voluntary.

Thank you for supporting CUNY undergraduate research!

My contact email is: jacob.frye32@login.cuny.edu - please feel free to reach out with any questions! I am doing more in-depth interviews, so if you are interested, please let me know!

So this bridge opened last weekend in my city. There's almost no sources of information about this project online that aren't in polish, I'll still link some of them and if you have trouble translating them just ask I'll try to help to best of my abilities.

Wikipedia page

It's not all rosy, especially when it comes to mixing flow of cyclists and pedestrians. I was there by bike and while on the bridge itself streams are separated, enter/exit ramps are just dangerous. No signs, no directions, no separations. Nothing to prevent accidents. You'd think that when designing a bridge exclusively for cyclists and pedestrians they'd think of that but nope, nothing. Just vibes.

We'll see, maybe they fix those issues before first serious incident.

Some of problems are also detailed in this article.

Anyway, it's still an interesting project and one can only hope it's as successful as neighboring Father Bernatka footbridge, which really revitalized both sides of the river. And I mean it went from unofficial public toilet to nice restaurants, coffee shops and just nice place to be, so fingers crossed it works here as well.

​

I wanted to share this visual example from India's brand new Delhi–Mumbai Expressway (NE4), which highlights a massive bottleneck in developing transit grids: world-class infrastructure outpacing driver education.

This is a newly built, multi-lane expressway designed for high-speed transit. However, due to zero enforcement of basic lane discipline, commercial trucks systematically create rolling roadblocks by driving side-by-side across all available lanes at identical low speeds (around 60 km/h).

The frustrating part is that the technology is already there. The government has deployed advanced, highly automated speed cameras that instantly track speed violations and mail out digital fines. Yet, they completely ignore lane-hogging.

It proves that building wide, expensive highways is completely pointless if the operational policy doesn't include automated lane management.

Questions, comments, concerns?

And, how might we safely incorporate bike lanes into this design without taking any space from properties or the sidewalk?

Location is JFK Blvd and Bergenline Ave in North Bergen, NJ

Architecture is always on the leading edge of creating identity. Yet in past history, buildings and monuments were constructed to stand the challenges of time creating a representational image of the given period, delivering a specific identity, collective consciousness, and sense of community.

Whether under democracy, oligarchy, dictatorships, or colonial empires architecture has been created that is a visual script to belonging, expressing a specific world view. Architecture over time has been a cornerstone of community and society. 

Modern times has seen the creation of multiple communities with individual identities encompassing the whole that is a city. Yet the structures we are building have not  the longevity and structural power as those of past societies. The city as a complete whole with an identity of its own today has many senses of community and belonging. Today people identify with their specific community within the city, their subculture. Today’s sense of belonging really hinges on a society basing itself on the subcultures within the whole. Architecture reflects more specific identities within the whole.

Will the future say that the architecture, city and community of today  changed from representing the whole of the city. Instead supporting  The communities within it ?  A period that lost its totality and became a representation of diversity within the whole. which is also mirrored into today’s architecture.

Typically, parking garages are built to conform to a limited amount of space and have to be built within whatever leftover part of the lot is available. After all, if you had plenty of space, you'd just have a parking lot.

But what if you had the ability to claim just about as much space as you want for a parking garage? What if your primary goals were about creating an efficient experience for the people parking, and were basically unconcerned about cost and footprint? What kind of designs could one utilize to create the most efficient design that still accommodates a large number of vehicles?

Would there be a shape that could deliver a better flow for traffic, so instead of having a rectangle one might have a fan shape or a circle?
Would ramps in the middle of the garage still be the way to go, or would it be better to have them on the outer edge? Would it work better with spiral ramps or straight ramps?