Americans are hungry for community. So why don't we have European-style squares?(cnn.com)
cnn.com
Americans are hungry for community. So why don't we have European-style squares?
https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/19/travel/europe-public-squares-american-development
47 comments
My question is being cognizant we don’t have money to throw away, what policies should we support towards better urban design.
Also, the timeless way of building
In America big cities “squares” are associated with crime and homelessness. Times Square (NYC) and Union Square (SF) being two examples.
The crime wave of the 80s and 90s really messed up urban architecture.
Parks got a similar reputation- even now there’s still a “good park”/“bad park” mentality.
Mass surveillance has its downsides, but safer public spaces is not one.
The crime wave of the 80s and 90s really messed up urban architecture.
Parks got a similar reputation- even now there’s still a “good park”/“bad park” mentality.
Mass surveillance has its downsides, but safer public spaces is not one.
> In America big cities “squares” are associated with crime and homelessness. Times Square (NYC) and Union Square (SF) being two examples.
Oh, that's what the main train station in any western European city exists for.
Oh, that's what the main train station in any western European city exists for.
Mere blocks from Union Square is http://frontier tower.io, a 16 story commercial building that was almost a we work. These German investors bought the building and turned it into a vertical village, a community. If you're in San Francisco and looking for community, look there!
> Mass surveillance has its downsides, but safer public spaces is not one.
Citation needed.
Citation needed.
People will say they want these things and then move to some far flung enclave of a suburb neighborhood, vote against transit and bike lanes, vote to widen highways, and fight removing parking minimums.
Because we can and do sacrifice everything for car culture - starting with childhood.
A good square is a place where a human being can be. That means if you want it to be vibrant the connecting streets also have to be places where humans want/need to be. And I specifically mean humans who walk and not cars. But how do they get there if you need to keep cars out?
Other reasons my european mind can think of why this doesn't work in the US:
- weird car-centric zoning regulations that lead to weirdly unorganic space use. Where I have my grocery store, my gym, my record shop and my doctor all within walking distance of my home that would be often utopian in the US. Good spaces are mixed spaces, and for that mixing has to be allowed
- generally an egoistic cut-throat society, where some would rather burn the money, than risk the chance of having someone else profit from it. But good public spaces thrive from the surrounding owners caring about the public spaces and the people within it as well.
- commercial interest trumps everything. In Europe many nice places are surounded by shops/redtaurants that are family owned for generations. And while economics do play a role also in Europe, they are not the be-all and end-all, when it comes to decisions. If your business has meaning to your whole family, you decide differently than a faceless megacorp that looks to extract value like a leech from everything that makes life worth living
Other reasons my european mind can think of why this doesn't work in the US:
- weird car-centric zoning regulations that lead to weirdly unorganic space use. Where I have my grocery store, my gym, my record shop and my doctor all within walking distance of my home that would be often utopian in the US. Good spaces are mixed spaces, and for that mixing has to be allowed
- generally an egoistic cut-throat society, where some would rather burn the money, than risk the chance of having someone else profit from it. But good public spaces thrive from the surrounding owners caring about the public spaces and the people within it as well.
- commercial interest trumps everything. In Europe many nice places are surounded by shops/redtaurants that are family owned for generations. And while economics do play a role also in Europe, they are not the be-all and end-all, when it comes to decisions. If your business has meaning to your whole family, you decide differently than a faceless megacorp that looks to extract value like a leech from everything that makes life worth living
Because the American way is to put a big ol' parking lot where that square would go.
Tailgating is American and is community.
> and is community
For some minutes during a few months, in a minuscule % of a massive number parking lots.
It doesn't feel like an in-kind replacement for what we've lost.
For some minutes during a few months, in a minuscule % of a massive number parking lots.
It doesn't feel like an in-kind replacement for what we've lost.
Every parking lot is an opportunity for community. In my experience tailgating is considerably more than minutes and has a very strong community. Admittedly I do not have much experience with tailgating but my limited experience strongly suggests that it is a very tight knit community that goes beyond the actual event.
Parking lots are private spaces where the store management can ask you to leave at any time. That some don't is almost a happy accident.
Compared to a public park where anyone is free to loiter and play. Plus parks are usually segregated from cars so you don't have to worry about a random car not paying attention killing you, the ground isn't hot pavement everywhere, there might be playground equipment and benches and picnic tables, etc.
Compared to a public park where anyone is free to loiter and play. Plus parks are usually segregated from cars so you don't have to worry about a random car not paying attention killing you, the ground isn't hot pavement everywhere, there might be playground equipment and benches and picnic tables, etc.
Cities own parking lots but privately owned parking lots are generally easier to get access to for events, far less red tape and who ever owns it gets brownie points with the community.
Not the reality around me. Almost all parking lots are privately owned. This is true for just about every US city I've ever lived in.
Every Walmart, every Target, every big store has its own parking lot that is private property.
Every Walmart, every Target, every big store has its own parking lot that is private property.
Who said anything about big stores? Every big city I have lived in has had a stadium and parking lots owned by either the stadium or third parties which allow tailgating and I have been to/was involved in a good many events held in private parking lots. Big stores open 7 days a week if not 24 hours a day are obviously not going to sacrifice their parking lots but a good number of parking lots are mostly vacant on the weekends, they serve the 5 days a week, 9-5 buisness world and they are more willing to sacrifice their mostly empty weekend lots.
> Every big city I have lived in has had a stadium and parking lots owned by either the stadium or third parties
So not the city, the stadium corporation (which might have ties to the city, but usually a wholly separate organization) or private third parties. Like I said.
> they are more willing to sacrifice their mostly empty weekend lots.
Once again I've had a lot of very mixed experiences on this one. Some don't care, some see it as an insurance liability. I've spent a lot of my life adjacent to commerical property management, I can't imagine most of these groups being thoroughly OK with unknown groups using their lots for whatever. Seems like a good chance to get sued.
So not the city, the stadium corporation (which might have ties to the city, but usually a wholly separate organization) or private third parties. Like I said.
> they are more willing to sacrifice their mostly empty weekend lots.
Once again I've had a lot of very mixed experiences on this one. Some don't care, some see it as an insurance liability. I've spent a lot of my life adjacent to commerical property management, I can't imagine most of these groups being thoroughly OK with unknown groups using their lots for whatever. Seems like a good chance to get sued.
> Tailgating is American
Not when you own a BMW or Audi.
Not when you own a BMW or Audi.
We're fairly business focused, so when someone goes man I wish there was a way to meet people, they create a .com to help people meet (filled with bots) instead of trying to actually meet people.
At any rate, bars DO exist in the United States and last I heard they didn't all go out of business in the last week.
At any rate, bars DO exist in the United States and last I heard they didn't all go out of business in the last week.
Bars. Gyms. Churches. Theater groups. Running clubs. Tech meetups. I'm sure I'm missing a few...
Each of these entities requires the work of creating and maintaining a specialized construct (often for profit) - which will then only attract a purposefully narrow audience.
Contrast this with public spaces that are attended by diverse people, because their attendance isn't constrained by ability to pay or having a particular interest.
The advantage of a public space is that it isn't an exclusionary club.
Contrast this with public spaces that are attended by diverse people, because their attendance isn't constrained by ability to pay or having a particular interest.
The advantage of a public space is that it isn't an exclusionary club.
I guess it depends on what you want. Do you want to meet people once, and never meet them again? Squares and parks are fine. But many people want community that is more than a series of one-off encounters. For them, they likely need something more than parks and squares.
Because we have mainstreets, buildings, blocks, community centers, parks, American-style squares, and so on. The sense of community that Americans are hungry for is ultimately the post war sort that has been dying out in recent decades; the ideal. We are a country in transition but the transition will probably not be shortened through planning, that is a bit too close to the dying post war ideal. Growing pains, we are still young.
> The sense of community that Americans are hungry for
But also, we only hear the loud, lonely voices yelling online. The people that aren't terminally online, and have great offline community aren't going to go find places where people are being depressing lonely and try and get everyone to touch grass. In science, that'd be a sampling bias.
But also, we only hear the loud, lonely voices yelling online. The people that aren't terminally online, and have great offline community aren't going to go find places where people are being depressing lonely and try and get everyone to touch grass. In science, that'd be a sampling bias.
Depends on what you mean by "young". By some measures, the U.S. is one of the oldest nations in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_sovereign_state...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_sovereign_state...
I am not talking about political borders. The countries of the new world are completely separated from the culture of the land, uncharted territory.
The city I live in practically didn't exist by most measures until the 1940s. Meanwhile many cities in Europe draw roots back a few thousand years BCE. The lot my house is on was barely even used as farmland in 1960, and got turned into a residential area finally in the 80s.
But sure I'll trust you in telling me this is a much older civilization than Greece. Makes sense.
But sure I'll trust you in telling me this is a much older civilization than Greece. Makes sense.
Mesolithic Greece, starting in 13,000 BC is more or less on par with civilisation in North Texas: https://www.thestoryoftexas.com/discover/campfire-stories/am...
Where Greece has it over your region is Paleolithic Greek history which stretches back further.
Where Greece has it over your region is Paleolithic Greek history which stretches back further.
Revisionist history you're pushing here. I'm well versed about the native tribes in the area, definitely more than the average North Texan. A very interesting history, don't get me wrong. They didn't develop cities like anything you'd think of as a city today. Small roaming developments of maybe a few hundred people tops mostly. So when we're discussing "urban design" it's pretty irrelevant. That some branch of a nomadic tribe might have used my neighborhood as a hunting ground 15,000 years ago has little impact to the discussion of it's urban development.
The Caddos would be the closest to making cities in the area, but the people living around there date back over a thousand years these larger communities we might call towns were still mostly small enclaves that didn't last more than a few hundred years at the longest mostly. And they were mostly a pretty recent, being a few thousand years newer of a civilization than Greece et. al., as they appeared well after 1,000CE
Meanwhile Athens and what not can easily be seen as an actual city even 2000BCE.
The Caddos would be the closest to making cities in the area, but the people living around there date back over a thousand years these larger communities we might call towns were still mostly small enclaves that didn't last more than a few hundred years at the longest mostly. And they were mostly a pretty recent, being a few thousand years newer of a civilization than Greece et. al., as they appeared well after 1,000CE
Meanwhile Athens and what not can easily be seen as an actual city even 2000BCE.
Not trying to compare Greece with North Texas(or Louisiana) in 13000BCE here. There are ancient sites with "sophisticated" cultures/societies that spanned large parts of the current mid to east US -- and were also unlikely to be nomadic tribes passing through.
There is evidence of major construction projects, large trade centers/complex societies along the Mississippi Valley covering large areas with a trade network across the mid/eastern/southeast US. Watson Brake is currently the oldest* at ~3500BCE[0], but less studied and smaller. Poverty Point ~1700BCE[1] is more like a city or major trading hub. The effort to build the mounds and ridges is far more impressive than is likely from a roaming tribe. The construction is not haphazard, there is evidence of housing and many astronomical markers/alignments throughout the mound builder cultures of North America.
Cahokia Mounds[2] (far more recent) is considered an urban settlement, occupied from around 800CE and at its peak 1050-1150CE, thought to be larger than London or Paris at that time.
* Watson Break was discovered in the 1980's and the 6th mound at Poverty Point discovered in 2013. There could be many more that have been overlooked/undiscovered or razed -- being that we still don't fully understand them and they hardy look like what we are use to.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_Brake
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_Point
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia
There is evidence of major construction projects, large trade centers/complex societies along the Mississippi Valley covering large areas with a trade network across the mid/eastern/southeast US. Watson Brake is currently the oldest* at ~3500BCE[0], but less studied and smaller. Poverty Point ~1700BCE[1] is more like a city or major trading hub. The effort to build the mounds and ridges is far more impressive than is likely from a roaming tribe. The construction is not haphazard, there is evidence of housing and many astronomical markers/alignments throughout the mound builder cultures of North America.
Cahokia Mounds[2] (far more recent) is considered an urban settlement, occupied from around 800CE and at its peak 1050-1150CE, thought to be larger than London or Paris at that time.
* Watson Break was discovered in the 1980's and the 6th mound at Poverty Point discovered in 2013. There could be many more that have been overlooked/undiscovered or razed -- being that we still don't fully understand them and they hardy look like what we are use to.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watson_Brake
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_Point
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia
I'm well aware of these. And yes, lots of areas around North America had quite complicated and developed societies with large trade networks and even "highways" connecting ancient cities.
But, these things are practically entirely disconnected to the societies of people living in the US today. And that's the point I'm making, this area is very young in terms of what is here now. That some other group developed something like a city several hundred miles away thousands of years before this town existed has effectively zero impact on the development of this place and the lives of the people who live here. This isn't necessarily the same for cities that have existed for hundreds or thousands of years which still even has some of the same streets and buildings of history.
You'd be hard pressed to find a single structure still used here today that was older than 1940 in this town outside of a few notable rare examples dating back to the 1920s, that's a closer example to my point. What's the age of the oldest building in Paris? How about London? Athens? Trier? These are places that have had a practically uninterrupted flow of people living in dense urban places for many hundreds to thousands of years. This is just not true for massive parts of the US. Few cities draw their roots back to even the 1500s, with many having their roots go to the 1800s or even newer.
But, these things are practically entirely disconnected to the societies of people living in the US today. And that's the point I'm making, this area is very young in terms of what is here now. That some other group developed something like a city several hundred miles away thousands of years before this town existed has effectively zero impact on the development of this place and the lives of the people who live here. This isn't necessarily the same for cities that have existed for hundreds or thousands of years which still even has some of the same streets and buildings of history.
You'd be hard pressed to find a single structure still used here today that was older than 1940 in this town outside of a few notable rare examples dating back to the 1920s, that's a closer example to my point. What's the age of the oldest building in Paris? How about London? Athens? Trier? These are places that have had a practically uninterrupted flow of people living in dense urban places for many hundreds to thousands of years. This is just not true for massive parts of the US. Few cities draw their roots back to even the 1500s, with many having their roots go to the 1800s or even newer.
> Revisionist history you're pushing here.
Which part of the Texas history link is incorrect?
Civilisation is civilisation . it comes with and without attributes such as cities and agriculture .. the point made is that the timelines in Texas strecth back 13,000 years.
> has little impact to the discussion of it's urban development.
Their urban development consisted of light footprints, seasonal migration in worn patterns, walking, etc.
That can be contrasted with how contemporary US citizens live, how the Dutch live, how varies other people still live today.
Which part of the Texas history link is incorrect?
Civilisation is civilisation . it comes with and without attributes such as cities and agriculture .. the point made is that the timelines in Texas strecth back 13,000 years.
> has little impact to the discussion of it's urban development.
Their urban development consisted of light footprints, seasonal migration in worn patterns, walking, etc.
That can be contrasted with how contemporary US citizens live, how the Dutch live, how varies other people still live today.
This is a discussion about urbanism, not just broadly "civilization". Nomadic tribes didn't live in urban environments.
The city I live in practically didn't exist until very modern times. The fact some people used to to hunt around here 16,000 years ago has little impact to the modern way the city was laid out and designed or the people who mostly live here today.
There's practically zero way to draw the roots of this town back to some group that camped here 16,000 years ago. Any form of lineage of civilization was lost a looooong time ago. Extremely few people would even draw their roots back to the Caddo, who are far more recent than anyone you're suggesting here.
The city I live in practically didn't exist until very modern times. The fact some people used to to hunt around here 16,000 years ago has little impact to the modern way the city was laid out and designed or the people who mostly live here today.
There's practically zero way to draw the roots of this town back to some group that camped here 16,000 years ago. Any form of lineage of civilization was lost a looooong time ago. Extremely few people would even draw their roots back to the Caddo, who are far more recent than anyone you're suggesting here.
This is a discussion about community - See thread title.
Some communities move - Not a hard concept for most.
Some communities move - Not a hard concept for most.
Yeah, they moved. Away from here, for many reasons, often under bad situations. And most no longer exist, and are thus irrelevant to the discussion of lineage of current towns.
Insane you're really arguing a suburb of North Texas is older or at least as old as Rome or Athens.
So yeah, as an identity, this area is extremely young in comparison. It absolutely does not draw its roots back 16,000 years. We are not an extention of the Caddo people, they were not an extension of the first peoples who were here.
> Because we have mainstreets, buildings, blocks, community centers, parks, American-style squares...
Seems to me we're talking urban design here! That's kind of the whole point of the article, looking at urbanism in Europe to the US. Maybe you're imagining some other topic, but urbanism is deep in the discussion overall. I don't think nomadic groups had a lot of thought to how wide their highways were or planning our their parking lots.
Insane you're really arguing a suburb of North Texas is older or at least as old as Rome or Athens.
So yeah, as an identity, this area is extremely young in comparison. It absolutely does not draw its roots back 16,000 years. We are not an extention of the Caddo people, they were not an extension of the first peoples who were here.
> Because we have mainstreets, buildings, blocks, community centers, parks, American-style squares...
Seems to me we're talking urban design here! That's kind of the whole point of the article, looking at urbanism in Europe to the US. Maybe you're imagining some other topic, but urbanism is deep in the discussion overall. I don't think nomadic groups had a lot of thought to how wide their highways were or planning our their parking lots.
> Insane you're really arguing a suburb of North Texas is older or at least as old as Rome or Athens.
That's your strawman.
I merely pointed out the area you live in has a long history of civilisation.
As pointed out in part by @1659447091 upthread, and as does North America in general - there was a great variation in culture across that area, some parts had very stable communities and reportedly taught the Europeans a thing or two about trade agreements and democracy <shrug>.
There's an odd bit in the HN guidelines
You have a nice life. All the best.
That's your strawman.
I merely pointed out the area you live in has a long history of civilisation.
As pointed out in part by @1659447091 upthread, and as does North America in general - there was a great variation in culture across that area, some parts had very stable communities and reportedly taught the Europeans a thing or two about trade agreements and democracy <shrug>.
There's an odd bit in the HN guidelines
Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously;
You have a nice life. All the best.
[deleted]
If you're going to cite the guidelines, I thought your "not a hard concept for most" was rather out of line.
I agree ..
It was a throw to now removed usage by the person I replied to in this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46342642
That and a few other choice phrases were well over the line.
They significantly edited their comments after I started using their own words in my replies.
Cleaning up after I quote the guidelines citing their usage leaves me looking the worse .. but so it goes.
I have a genuine interest in human history across the globe, they had a visceral reaction to the mere suggestion of prior occupation and use of land in Texas .. let's just mark that down to them having a bad day.
It was a throw to now removed usage by the person I replied to in this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46342642
That and a few other choice phrases were well over the line.
They significantly edited their comments after I started using their own words in my replies.
Cleaning up after I quote the guidelines citing their usage leaves me looking the worse .. but so it goes.
I have a genuine interest in human history across the globe, they had a visceral reaction to the mere suggestion of prior occupation and use of land in Texas .. let's just mark that down to them having a bad day.
You’re absolutely right about this.
The Republic of Venice, Holy Roman Empire, and Poland-Lithuania Commonwealth were all still around when America was founded.
Malta was still under the control of the Crusaders. Mongols still occupied Crimea.
The modern European map really comes from the 19th and 20th centuries.
Many European memories of nationhood are quite fake, and often deliberately so.
The Republic of Venice, Holy Roman Empire, and Poland-Lithuania Commonwealth were all still around when America was founded.
Malta was still under the control of the Crusaders. Mongols still occupied Crimea.
The modern European map really comes from the 19th and 20th centuries.
Many European memories of nationhood are quite fake, and often deliberately so.
Yeah, but it doesn’t fit into the American mythos, I guess.
Part of the country doesn’t even like many of the others. Let’s fix that. Sometimes I wonder if having all the US teams play against each other with fake cities or states attached to them (because the players aren’t even from that area) hurts more than helps.
We have something similar in major cities. We have them here in Chicago.
I love this book, and it is used in many Urban Planning courses. She notes that Rockefeller Plaza works because it borrows life from the city. It is surrounded by offices, shops, restaurants, transit and used all day by different groups (workers, tourists, skaters, diners). Rockefeller Plaza succeeds because it is intensely connected to daily life and fed by continuous pedestrian traffic.