Show me the person who claims to like URBAN SPRAWL and I will show you a “property developer”. 

Meanwhile, with a covetous eye on the “youth vote”, politicians are constantly demanding a HUGE increase in sprawl, sorry “home building”, in order to allow as many young people as possible to “get a foot on the (accursed) housing ladder”..!  

As a boy I witnessed nondescript housing estates slowly engulfing the countryside on the edge of my town and the relentless destruction of woodland and wildlife habitat for housing estates saddened me back then as it does now. Sprawl continues its relentless ugly growth due.  Most people assume this is due to population increase, but a bigger factor is that average household size has shrunk from 4 or 5 persons per home (about 100 years ago) to little more than 2 today..!  So, even without any population increase, we now need TWICE AS MANY HOMES per capita as we did in the past. 

Our sprawling “suburbias” of bland little brick boxes are built on PRIME land because it is much easier to build on relatively flat land occupied by meadows, fields and woodland. No better example exists than London, which was founded on a fertile alluvial river basin. It is sadly ironic that the cancer-like growth of London has annihilated the adjacent countryside which nurtured it and was the reason for its existence.

THE SIMPLE SOLUTION TO SPRAWL…

Although most people seem to regard the idea of enclosed cities (aka “Arcologies”) with an IRRATIONAL DREAD, the idea should have enormous appeal to anyone concerned with countryside conservation, since they would occupy a small fraction of the land used by conventional housing.  Each city module would be surrounded by an extensive “Domain” – a sylvan sanctuary of the most exquisite gardens and parkland.  Such habitats would instantly cure our obsession with mass car ownership (Mad Cars Disease), meaning a HUGE reduction in noise, pollution, energy consumption, deaths and maiming, and a whole host of other motor nasties like arguing over parking rights – and ROAD RAGE..!  They would also ameliorate, and possible eliminate, common urban nuisances like bad neighbours.   Finally, they could even make BAD WEATHER a pleasurable experience..!            

So why are people repelled by an idea which has so many positive aspects, especially for the environment..?  Since no arcology yet exists this irrational attitude must be due to the influence of sci-fi movies which tend to portray a post-apocalyptic future – a dystopian world whose frightened denizens live in over-polluted and over-populated “HUMAN HIVES” ruled over by an authoritarian and tyrannical government.   Entertainment industry propaganda is powerful and many people are easily hypnotised by the insidious HollyWEIRD agenda that – at least in recent decades – depicts an inverted reality where good is bad, and bad is good..!    In reality Arcologies could be mini-paradises..!

Life in an Arcology would be comparable to living in a resort hotel.  Yes, living spaces will be smaller than what most of us are used to, but they will be SMARTER better-organised SPACES like we see in cruise ships, mobile homes, etc – as well as being SAFER, FRIENDLIER, and far more CONVENIENT.  The compact pyramidal design would conserve vast swathes of land, thus saving the countryside from being buried under endless “road-improvement” schemes and sprawling match-box housing “developments”.  Compactness means that workplaces, schools, shops, and recreational needs would all be within easy walking distance – thus negating any need for cars and the stressful time-wasting of commuting.   The enormous savings in land costs, building materials, and utility infrastructure, etc., would make more funds available for aesthetic beautification – an exotic plant-festooned atrium on the inside and a fabulously landscaped nature domain on the outside.   And the facility to collect rainfall, solar and wind power would solve our most pressing environment issues.  

Aside from being cleaner, quieter, safer, stress-free, healthier, and more attractive than conventional car-dependent sprawl cities – I also surmised that finite-sized communities would be more friendly, more trusting, and more community-conscious than “open borders” 2D sprawl cities (OBeCities) where many people barely know their neighbours, and quite often dislike or hate them for any number of reasons – most of which will not apply in OAeCities..!

 

Whilst OBeCities consist of countless thousands of small and medium buildings, 3rd Millennium Oasis Cities will comprise just a few dozen very large buildings, each one a self-contained community in its own right.