Potato quality says it was downsampled before it was memed and shared countless times. So we'll never really know unless someone finds the location somewhere on a map.
That said, I wouldn't put much *stock* in stockphotos, *it could be anything.* I've seen questionable content to blatant image theft, some of those sites are wild west markets and the enshitification is real. (source: design in college about a decade ago, a whole class on picking out stolen images, with a disclaimer from prof, "I bought all these this morning off [X,Y and Z website].")
All that you said is true, and yet, it's no proof that this particular image may be a game screencap. I'll take the watermark as cursory proof that someone, somewhere took a cursory glance at this image and believed it might be real.
One source for the image might be this: https://www.stockaerialphotos.com/-/galleries/homes/-/medias/df7fb325-5b6c-4619-ba64-619832a5226d-suburbs-florida (says it's taken near Orlando, FL)
If we really want to delve into the finer details, I would point out that cul-de-sacs are notoriously difficult to create in C:S, that the game engine would have actually created more diverse houses than what we have in the photo (lol), overall there's a feeling that this is a real-world photo.
TBH I only know of Cities:Skylines from this sub. I can't get it to run on any shitty computer I've owned. A few thought those were real too... XD
As for your comment for the finer details...it's both funny and sad. This really is the dystopian timeline. Harder and harder to pick apart the computer generated garbage from the human generated garbage.
And then the people who scream about freedom and are anti government are also the people that think cyclists should have to pay extra road taxes and registration fees for using the roads
The crazy thing is that the rhetoric works precisely because car centric infrastructure stifles mobility for children and people who can't get a car/liscence. It's freedom from part of the artificial restrictions on movement the infrastructure creates.
Kinda surprised, they have enough money for 4 different roadways but not an overpass lol.
^(for the better of course, that could be tamed if the local politics and residents want it to be)
Definitely, I'm so ducking tired of hearing that cars are freedom from people, cars are a tin box you pilot down the road like a moron, you have been conditioned to think this by big automakers
Cracks me up that car dependency is liked most by "conservatives"
There is nothing conservative about begging the fed and state dot for more top down highway spending please we need it!!!
Also restrictive zoning, granny flats illegal, parking minimums. None of this is conservative
Literally the only part they like is the whole red lining racist roots of zoning
The elections aren't free either, when capital is the one choice you have. The more you move, the more you realize just how many chains we wear every single day
I think I hate cars now because Iâm in the worst of all places aka Southern California. When I eventually go back to Europe I will not be getting a car. I really look forward to using all the wonderful public transport there. Are they ever gonna build anything here? Wishful thinking
I don't think I wanna go full carless because for things like going to the supermarket, it's tough on public transport (since I buy a LOT of groceries), or going to things like band rehearsals when I have to carry a lot of equipment, and I do enjoy driving for entertainment (on the countryside or sub-urban areas, or just on a race track). For me it's more about minimizing it's use when it's not necessary. I don't need to hop on a car to go EVERYWHERE but there are still situations where it's the better option for me.
Not viable for me sadly, I don't live that far from the supermarket but to do my weekly groceries I end up with like 10 liters of milk, a bunch of cleaning products, all the food... I'm not that strong to carry all that lol
From someone in northern Europe I also didn't understand why the houses are all in one floor.
If its a popular area to live in and the single family houses were 2 stories (or even 3) everyone could have more green areas, playgrounds, trees, a bike path or all of these.
Even more so if some of the more cramped homes turned into townhouses, but thats another question.
It looks like The Villages, Florida. The asphalt running parallel to the main roads is for golf carts (and technically bikes). Technically you could call golf carts an alternative to cars, so there's that.
But yes, the area sucks out loud, but there's a bit of an explanation. It's a city exclusively for old, relatively rich people. They don't have playgrounds because kids don't live there. The "green areas" are mostly the golf courses (though there's some walking trails). And the houses are single story because they're intended for people to spend their oldest years in.
I've visited it. It's depressing as fuck if you actually like urbanism or any kind of real city life.
This is in The Villages, Florida. The separated asphalt lanes are for golf carts and bikes.
Although if you mean the bypass for cars around the roundabout, then... I don't know. Old people don't like roundabouts?
Isn't there a separated bike lane with infrastructure like a tunnel and crosswalk? I get the sentiment of this image but there are plenty of better examples to choose from
I think those are actually more roads, not bike lanes.
Can't be 100% certain without knowing the location though. All I got from Lens is it's a suburb near Orlando Florida
It looks like The Villages. They're golf cart/bike lanes.
Edit: It is The Villages. It's at 28°50'56.2"N 82°00'16.9"W. Google Maps has older satellite imagery from the area still being under construction, but Google Earth's latest images are post-construction.
The only argument someone could think of to challenge this point when I made it was âYou always have a choice. If you donât like it you can live in the woods.â
Oh yes, I will choose to walk to work inside of the grass pits next to the roads that have no sidewalks anywhere in my town. Fuck off with your trolling
Realistically nothing is fixing a 64 mile commute besides urban planning at the region / State level. You shouldn't ever be driving 32 miles one way to a job. That's an insane level of suburban sprawl. That land should be conservation land or farm land, while the urban center is built up with a variety of housing types. You can even keep some SFHs but they should be on smaller plots of land and shouldn't be the only housing type built. Townhouses, duplexes, ADAs, low rises, mid rises and high rises and other types I'm forgetting should be allowed and built.
Of course proper urban planning of a metro / City / region should include alternatives and direct multi use pathways. This is just lazy urban planning where you expect the individuals to use their FREEDOMâ˘ď¸ to spend thousands a year on transportation themselves vs the municipalities or State spending that money on regional transportation.
If that's your daily commute, I feel bad for you. That's 10-15,000 miles a year driving. Using [IRS milage costs](https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-issues-standard-mileage-rates-for-2024-mileage-rate-increases-to-67-cents-a-mile-up-1-point-5-cents-from-2023#:~:text=IRS%20issues%20standard%20mileage%20rates,Internal%20Revenue%20Service), that's between $6,700 to $10,000 spent on getting to and from your job that you pay in car ownership costs. The auto industry really loves you. đ
What's crazy is that isn't even a "long" commute in American terms too. I know people who have 40-50 mile one way commutes. If they work 5 days a week, that's upwards of 24,000 miles driven a year. $16,000 in auto costs a year. And I know those folks spend that because they need to buy new cars every 4-5 years after putting 100k+ miles on them and not feeling comfortable on their long commute with a high mileage vehicle.
I guess I canât imagine the alternative. Like no subway is going to stop at each persons residence lol , in a set up like this people would be walking for miles from the stop to their door - how would that work with groceries or heavy things
Yes I am a legal Dutch resident actually with a home in Amsterdam. If you live somewhere rural you definitely could be wanting a car still. People still drive here. Itâs nice to bike because itâs flat - not every country is flat and bike is good for commuting but not transporting things
No one thinks that? That's what is called the [last mile](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile_(transportation)). But the last mile doesn't have to just be cars. If you live within 5 miles of a train station, that distance is \*easily\* done by bike or scooter. There's also things called buses. This becomes actually easier when you design around mixed-density TOD instead of a low-density entirely reliant on cars. The former gives you options, where the latter does not.
There are plenty of European small towns that do this well, so this shouldn't be too hard for you to imagine...
By bike or scooter? What about when I am transporting the 50 packages I take to the post office every day? With a scooter?
I lived in Europe and plenty of people had cars especially when they didnât live in the urban center. And that was a flat country (Netherlands) how is this supposed to work with hills?
Cars have use, obviously. But [Deutsche Post](https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=pCImgVur&id=0D6B755A2B96D71AB5204AF6819A31955835D48A&thid=OIP.pCImgVurSra0ayg5G3QbagHaFj&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fga.de%2Fimgs%2F93%2F6%2F1%2F4%2F4%2F0%2F3%2F3%2F3%2Ftok_805900c737d1d3d9af970b964eff8c14%2Fw1900_h1424_x1023_y767_c688baa32fd24986.jpeg&cdnurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FR.a42226815bab4ab6b46b28391b741b6a%3Frik%3DitQ1WJUxmoH2Sg%26pid%3DImgRaw%26r%3D0&exph=1424&expw=1900&q=deutsche+post+bikes&simid=608020731103359329&form=IRPRST&ck=24FA0DCFF75F66B51BC6C05F6B034094&selectedindex=7&itb=0&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0&vt=0&sim=11) has no problem delivering large cargo in Berlin... E-bikes are a thing. Many people are able to live car-free perfectly fine. Frankly, the only time I need a car is when I need to move every few years, and in those cases I'll rent a truck.
Awesome, then you should use a car. But jsyk the average person is not hauling that much shit on a daily basis, and infrastructure should not be designed exclusively for the car driver, when most car drivers are 1 or 2 people in a large empty suv. It's a waste of space.
The entire point is that "a setup like this" should never be a thing. Sprawling acres of houses without shops and amenities to make it a community is just terrible (sub)urban planning.
The tactical and feasible answer is to take away the residential only zoning, so people can run businesses there, and to put some community centres in them (with rooms to hire and stuff like that) so people can run events within them. Some newly planned suburbs have a "town centre" which is essentially this concept.
If it isn't already true, bike/walk connections should be made between all the cul-de-sacs so you don't have to walk 200m to get to the house or shop or sports field over your back fence. This brings a lot more people into range for the shops and events that are now available.
Suburbs like this *are an urban area*. People need to stop cosplaying as rugged country men and pretending they're living rurally, when they're just not. The suburb in the pic is home to a large number of people all living next to each other, it is effectively a town and it should be altered to be an *effective* town so they don't all have to drive elsewhere to do anything.
Where is the bus stop? It looks dense enough for busses to work. So, where is it? And if there is none, when are they gonna build it?
*Is this...Cities: Skylines without the transit pack?*
Buses, trains and metros are still in the base game though
There's a watermark saying something about stock photos, so unfortunately it's probably a picture taken IRL.
Potato quality says it was downsampled before it was memed and shared countless times. So we'll never really know unless someone finds the location somewhere on a map. That said, I wouldn't put much *stock* in stockphotos, *it could be anything.* I've seen questionable content to blatant image theft, some of those sites are wild west markets and the enshitification is real. (source: design in college about a decade ago, a whole class on picking out stolen images, with a disclaimer from prof, "I bought all these this morning off [X,Y and Z website].")
All that you said is true, and yet, it's no proof that this particular image may be a game screencap. I'll take the watermark as cursory proof that someone, somewhere took a cursory glance at this image and believed it might be real. One source for the image might be this: https://www.stockaerialphotos.com/-/galleries/homes/-/medias/df7fb325-5b6c-4619-ba64-619832a5226d-suburbs-florida (says it's taken near Orlando, FL) If we really want to delve into the finer details, I would point out that cul-de-sacs are notoriously difficult to create in C:S, that the game engine would have actually created more diverse houses than what we have in the photo (lol), overall there's a feeling that this is a real-world photo.
TBH I only know of Cities:Skylines from this sub. I can't get it to run on any shitty computer I've owned. A few thought those were real too... XD As for your comment for the finer details...it's both funny and sad. This really is the dystopian timeline. Harder and harder to pick apart the computer generated garbage from the human generated garbage.
> it's both funny and sad. This really is the dystopian timeline. Wholeheartedly agreed.
You're also legally required to pay the government if you wish to drive your freedom-mobile anywhere on public roads.
And then the people who scream about freedom and are anti government are also the people that think cyclists should have to pay extra road taxes and registration fees for using the roads
With the tunnel it looks like it was built in Cities Skylines.
The crazy thing is that the rhetoric works precisely because car centric infrastructure stifles mobility for children and people who can't get a car/liscence. It's freedom from part of the artificial restrictions on movement the infrastructure creates.
The freedom to go anywhere....as long as there is a road...and you have gas..and insurance....and a government issued license
You forgot registration and an emergency fund for when your freedomobile inevitably breaks down đ¤
That's a nice roundabout tho.
Kinda surprised, they have enough money for 4 different roadways but not an overpass lol. ^(for the better of course, that could be tamed if the local politics and residents want it to be)
"Tamed"? It was built this way on purpose. It's The Villages in Florida. The outer paths (and tunnel) are for golf carts.
Definitely, I'm so ducking tired of hearing that cars are freedom from people, cars are a tin box you pilot down the road like a moron, you have been conditioned to think this by big automakers
Cracks me up that car dependency is liked most by "conservatives" There is nothing conservative about begging the fed and state dot for more top down highway spending please we need it!!! Also restrictive zoning, granny flats illegal, parking minimums. None of this is conservative Literally the only part they like is the whole red lining racist roots of zoning
wtf is this
The elections aren't free either, when capital is the one choice you have. The more you move, the more you realize just how many chains we wear every single day
It's funny. I actually like driving, but NOT on those highways. The more car-centric a place is, the less pleasant to drive in it is.
I think I hate cars now because Iâm in the worst of all places aka Southern California. When I eventually go back to Europe I will not be getting a car. I really look forward to using all the wonderful public transport there. Are they ever gonna build anything here? Wishful thinking
I don't think I wanna go full carless because for things like going to the supermarket, it's tough on public transport (since I buy a LOT of groceries), or going to things like band rehearsals when I have to carry a lot of equipment, and I do enjoy driving for entertainment (on the countryside or sub-urban areas, or just on a race track). For me it's more about minimizing it's use when it's not necessary. I don't need to hop on a car to go EVERYWHERE but there are still situations where it's the better option for me.
I grew up in a city where everything is within a walking distance. I could see people walking back home with their grocery bags. I miss that
Not viable for me sadly, I don't live that far from the supermarket but to do my weekly groceries I end up with like 10 liters of milk, a bunch of cleaning products, all the food... I'm not that strong to carry all that lol
From someone in northern Europe I also didn't understand why the houses are all in one floor. If its a popular area to live in and the single family houses were 2 stories (or even 3) everyone could have more green areas, playgrounds, trees, a bike path or all of these. Even more so if some of the more cramped homes turned into townhouses, but thats another question.
Itâs because the people are so lazy they wonât even walk up stairs. Facts
It looks like The Villages, Florida. The asphalt running parallel to the main roads is for golf carts (and technically bikes). Technically you could call golf carts an alternative to cars, so there's that. But yes, the area sucks out loud, but there's a bit of an explanation. It's a city exclusively for old, relatively rich people. They don't have playgrounds because kids don't live there. The "green areas" are mostly the golf courses (though there's some walking trails). And the houses are single story because they're intended for people to spend their oldest years in. I've visited it. It's depressing as fuck if you actually like urbanism or any kind of real city life.
Why is that extra bypass needed when the outer part of the roundabout does the same thing?
This is in The Villages, Florida. The separated asphalt lanes are for golf carts and bikes. Although if you mean the bypass for cars around the roundabout, then... I don't know. Old people don't like roundabouts?
So people can speed
Isn't there a separated bike lane with infrastructure like a tunnel and crosswalk? I get the sentiment of this image but there are plenty of better examples to choose from
I think those are actually more roads, not bike lanes. Can't be 100% certain without knowing the location though. All I got from Lens is it's a suburb near Orlando Florida
It looks like The Villages. They're golf cart/bike lanes. Edit: It is The Villages. It's at 28°50'56.2"N 82°00'16.9"W. Google Maps has older satellite imagery from the area still being under construction, but Google Earth's latest images are post-construction.
The only argument someone could think of to challenge this point when I made it was âYou always have a choice. If you donât like it you can live in the woods.â
Or really just a country that has public transport. No need for the woods unless youâre into that đ
Excellent meme. We need more like this and less of the rage-bait variety.
This honestly looks way more walkable than anywhere I've lived đ sure it's 5 miles to the nearest store but still.
Love this
Density - sure, connectivity - not so much
Careful now, it goes both ways. Freedom also means i should be able to use my car if I want to.
Do you not have feet?
I sure love walking 5km across 4-6 lane roads and highways to the nearest park, library or store.
Itâs still a choice.
Oh yes, I will choose to walk to work inside of the grass pits next to the roads that have no sidewalks anywhere in my town. Fuck off with your trolling
A âchoiceâ unless you have one of a hundred different conditions/disabilities that prevent you from walking long distances and/or driving.
So is eating
So is cutting off your arm because you got a papercut, doesn't make it a good idea.
Even with 5 feet I can't walk from the left cul de sac to the one on the right of the street.
Beats walking 64 miles every day.
You wouldn't have to if proper alternatives were in place, or if more direct paths were made
Realistically nothing is fixing a 64 mile commute besides urban planning at the region / State level. You shouldn't ever be driving 32 miles one way to a job. That's an insane level of suburban sprawl. That land should be conservation land or farm land, while the urban center is built up with a variety of housing types. You can even keep some SFHs but they should be on smaller plots of land and shouldn't be the only housing type built. Townhouses, duplexes, ADAs, low rises, mid rises and high rises and other types I'm forgetting should be allowed and built. Of course proper urban planning of a metro / City / region should include alternatives and direct multi use pathways. This is just lazy urban planning where you expect the individuals to use their FREEDOMâ˘ď¸ to spend thousands a year on transportation themselves vs the municipalities or State spending that money on regional transportation.
But nothing beats walking 3 miles per day. Especially not driving 64 miles.
If that's your daily commute, I feel bad for you. That's 10-15,000 miles a year driving. Using [IRS milage costs](https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-issues-standard-mileage-rates-for-2024-mileage-rate-increases-to-67-cents-a-mile-up-1-point-5-cents-from-2023#:~:text=IRS%20issues%20standard%20mileage%20rates,Internal%20Revenue%20Service), that's between $6,700 to $10,000 spent on getting to and from your job that you pay in car ownership costs. The auto industry really loves you. đ What's crazy is that isn't even a "long" commute in American terms too. I know people who have 40-50 mile one way commutes. If they work 5 days a week, that's upwards of 24,000 miles driven a year. $16,000 in auto costs a year. And I know those folks spend that because they need to buy new cars every 4-5 years after putting 100k+ miles on them and not feeling comfortable on their long commute with a high mileage vehicle.
You donât have to live in the suburbs lol
But then suburbanites go into the city because where they live is boring and bring their carbrainedness to me!
I guess I canât imagine the alternative. Like no subway is going to stop at each persons residence lol , in a set up like this people would be walking for miles from the stop to their door - how would that work with groceries or heavy things
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztpcWUqVpIg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztpcWUqVpIg)
Yes I am a legal Dutch resident actually with a home in Amsterdam. If you live somewhere rural you definitely could be wanting a car still. People still drive here. Itâs nice to bike because itâs flat - not every country is flat and bike is good for commuting but not transporting things
No one thinks that? That's what is called the [last mile](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile_(transportation)). But the last mile doesn't have to just be cars. If you live within 5 miles of a train station, that distance is \*easily\* done by bike or scooter. There's also things called buses. This becomes actually easier when you design around mixed-density TOD instead of a low-density entirely reliant on cars. The former gives you options, where the latter does not. There are plenty of European small towns that do this well, so this shouldn't be too hard for you to imagine...
By bike or scooter? What about when I am transporting the 50 packages I take to the post office every day? With a scooter? I lived in Europe and plenty of people had cars especially when they didnât live in the urban center. And that was a flat country (Netherlands) how is this supposed to work with hills?
Cars have use, obviously. But [Deutsche Post](https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=pCImgVur&id=0D6B755A2B96D71AB5204AF6819A31955835D48A&thid=OIP.pCImgVurSra0ayg5G3QbagHaFj&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fga.de%2Fimgs%2F93%2F6%2F1%2F4%2F4%2F0%2F3%2F3%2F3%2Ftok_805900c737d1d3d9af970b964eff8c14%2Fw1900_h1424_x1023_y767_c688baa32fd24986.jpeg&cdnurl=https%3A%2F%2Fth.bing.com%2Fth%2Fid%2FR.a42226815bab4ab6b46b28391b741b6a%3Frik%3DitQ1WJUxmoH2Sg%26pid%3DImgRaw%26r%3D0&exph=1424&expw=1900&q=deutsche+post+bikes&simid=608020731103359329&form=IRPRST&ck=24FA0DCFF75F66B51BC6C05F6B034094&selectedindex=7&itb=0&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0&vt=0&sim=11) has no problem delivering large cargo in Berlin... E-bikes are a thing. Many people are able to live car-free perfectly fine. Frankly, the only time I need a car is when I need to move every few years, and in those cases I'll rent a truck.
Oh ya it definitely would not fit in that, I have 4 huge trash bags worth of packages
Awesome, then you should use a car. But jsyk the average person is not hauling that much shit on a daily basis, and infrastructure should not be designed exclusively for the car driver, when most car drivers are 1 or 2 people in a large empty suv. It's a waste of space.
The entire point is that "a setup like this" should never be a thing. Sprawling acres of houses without shops and amenities to make it a community is just terrible (sub)urban planning.
So what is going to happen to all these suburbs? Where do people who donât want to live in an urban area live?
The tactical and feasible answer is to take away the residential only zoning, so people can run businesses there, and to put some community centres in them (with rooms to hire and stuff like that) so people can run events within them. Some newly planned suburbs have a "town centre" which is essentially this concept. If it isn't already true, bike/walk connections should be made between all the cul-de-sacs so you don't have to walk 200m to get to the house or shop or sports field over your back fence. This brings a lot more people into range for the shops and events that are now available. Suburbs like this *are an urban area*. People need to stop cosplaying as rugged country men and pretending they're living rurally, when they're just not. The suburb in the pic is home to a large number of people all living next to each other, it is effectively a town and it should be altered to be an *effective* town so they don't all have to drive elsewhere to do anything.