U.S. cities vs. European cities

The BBC looks at urban planning in Britain, and authors of a magazine piece suggest that the UK should look to the continent - not the States - for inspiration. It is certainly a valid point that many American cities could have been planned better. Cities that have grown quickly in the automobile era (Los Angeles, many others) aren't planned as well as many European cities.

For some reason, though, the authors choose to use Phoenix as an example of a typical American city in this comparison with Barcelona. Yes, Phoenix:

BARCELONA:

* Integrated urban transport (rail, metro, trams, buses)
* Investment in creativity and culture
* Dense new development
* Strong city leadership
* New squares and parks

PHOENIX:

* Strong economy... but
* Growing pains from population growth
* Poor public transport
* Sprawl, unplanned development
* "Edge cities" compete with old downtown

I'd like better public transportation in the U.S. as well, but I don't think Phoenix is an exemplar American city. Pittsburgh, for example, has a pretty good tranport system, and it's free for college students. Lots of parks as well. And then there's Boston, Portland, San Francisco, New York, D.C., etc.

Anyway, read it here.

Check out the comments, too.