Why Moscow is going to increase its size? Well, because skyscrapers are bad. They have no future, they make density of population per one square km so big. If in one house there can live 10000 pales and there are just 4 streets around this skyscraper, isn't that clear that there will be something like rush hour all the time? Well, this high traffic congestion was one of the biggest reasons why Moscow is now going to grow not to the sky but to the savanna around it. This is first step in skyscrapers last swan's song.

If Moscow continues to increase its size, they're gonna look like they're on steroids. But I guess everything in Moscow is as big as Texas.

I agree but the main reason why I started this thread was to show, that for future cities there are no place for (even higher) skyscrapers because they have problems with infrastructure around as I said in my previous post.

Not every country has as much space as Russia to expand its cities. Have you ever been to western europe?

Yes, about Holland i have opinion that everything in this country is in two floors - street under Ajax stadium, ship way over road, airport over autobahn, very little streets in old cities, i saw it all with my own eyes and I know that your next door country problems with space.

In Belgium I saw a little better situation, but even then in Brussels there are tunnels under main street for transit, I haven't seen nothing like that in big countries as Germany, for example, you have problems too.

Skyscrapers are not bad, infact they are very good - cities cannot expand forever because land is finite so it makes sense to build high.

PS shouldnt this thread be in city talk?

yes, you can build high, but then starts problem with cars around these high houses, and now Moscow found solution for this. All old cities that have no space where to grow will have to make very hard decisions to make situation better as high houses will be builded and number of vehicles increases.

Number of vehicles will increase either way.

but we can build lower houses so there will be more spave for cars, imagine, if there are 2 cars for family house that have 4 streets around or 100 cars for one office building, there are some difference between that impact these two make on traffic congestion.

Skyscrapers are not bad, infact they are very good - cities cannot expand forever because land is finite so it makes sense to build high.

PS shouldnt this thread be in city talk?

ok, can mods move this thread if its better?

I think that it is better to build 300 meters tall skyscraper than polute a vital agricultural soil with ugly catalogue houses. It is better for urban planning, infrastructure, and for global reputation of the city. Just remember LA, that is one of the brightest examples of how a global city should not look like.

but we can build lower houses

So we have more sprawl?

The problem in moscow isn't population density or highrises, it's the bad street pattern. In southern Europe e.g, the block size usually is small, so you have not only high population densities but also a high road density allowing many cars.

Moscow, like Beijing, only has a few big roads which have to take up all the traffic, because the small streets within the neighborhood are only cul-de-sacs. You can't use them for travelling short distances. Even when you drive only a short distance, you have to go on the big road. Of course that leads to congestion.

A large factor of traffic is metro trains. I am not familiar with Moscow's subway line layout, but perhaps that could be a potential solution for the city planners.

but we can build lower houses so there will be more spave for cars, imagine, if there are 2 cars for family house that have 4 streets around or 100 cars for one office building, there are some difference between that impact these two make on traffic congestion.
If the country is to borrow ideas from the West, shouldn't they at least be the good ideas (i.e. not this)?

And seems to forget the arcology concept...one day, there will be humans living in towers, and they will spend their life inside them ! Of course it will not be majority, but still interesting concept, especially in ageing societies.