Dear fellow urban designers, I'm turning to you for advice. I'm currently working on a project in a village in the Netherlands to propose a redesign of its central square. One of the most sensitive topics concerns car use.

Current situation: a road runs across the square, giving cars access. There are 6 parking spots meant for limited use (30 minutes). However, these parking spots are often used for longer periods, sometimes an entire day or more, by visitors or by local residents and entrepreneurs with nearby stores. Cars also park on the square itself. This is not allowed, but no physical barrier prevents it. Both parking duration and parking on the square are loosely regulated, either because the municipality has limited resources or because this situation has become the status quo. Many residents want to limit car access to this square, and there are valid arguments for and against it.

Arguments for:

• Car access to this square is only useful for people whose destination is on the square itself. The other side of the square is easily reached by car in a 1-2 minute detour.
• Plenty of parking is available just behind the buildings to the left of the square, about 50 meters away.
• Limiting car use on the square encourages walking and cycling, creates a more pleasant, dedicated visitor area, and may extend stays.

Arguments against:

• Trucks and buses use this road to service nearby stores. Lack of access complicates this.
• Some store owners have directed their business toward customers who come in and out quickly, sometimes or regularly by car.
• Some store owners mention the importance of accessibility for elderly people who rely on parking in front of the store.

Weighing everything we've collected for this project, the most supported course of action is to limit car access (not entirely, though). Knowing what you know now, what are your views? If we suggest limiting car access, how do we explain it properly to the store owners who, in their experience, rely on car access?

Hi I'm a recent grad, and I'm really struggling in the job market and wanted to get some honest feedback. I was talking to an alumni career coach, and she mentioned getting certification like smaller certificates from my university for nonprofit management(this was her example, I would try to get one more applicable to urban design), in order to boost my career. I'm in the process of applying for a masters, but is getting certifications worth it in the meantime? They can cost hundreds of dollars, and I'm pretty broke at the moment. What is the cost benefit analysis of this? Are there any certifications besides the AICP that I should consider getting, or are they a waste of time and money?

OC : https://www.instagram.com/reel/Dejbt2UvZ-q/

Hi everyone,

I’m looking for honest advice from people in urban / regional / city planning or related fields.

My background:

• Undergraduate degree in Commerce
• MBA in Entrepreneurship
• Postgraduate diploma in HR

I’ve realized I don’t want to stay in a traditional business/HR path long term, and I’m seriously considering a Master’s in Planning. I’m interested in things like city development, housing, transport, sustainability, and how policies shape communities.

Before I commit the time and money, I’d really appreciate your input on:

1. Job market reality
   • What does the current job market for planners look like where you are?
   • Are entry-level roles for new planning graduates competitive, or are there reasonable opportunities?
2. Types of roles
   • What kind of jobs do planning graduates usually get? (government/municipal, consulting, private sector, NGOs, research, etc.)
   • Are there particular areas that are in higher demand right now (transportation, housing, environmental/climate, policy, etc.)?
3. My background – help or hindrance?
   • Does coming from a commerce / business / HR background help at all in planning, or is it mostly irrelevant?
   • Are there planning-related roles where business/HR/management skills are actually an advantage (e.g., project management, stakeholder engagement, economic development, community development, policy work)?
4. What employers actually care about
   • How important are skills like GIS, data analysis, design/visualization tools, and policy analysis?
   • In your experience, do employers care more about:
     • the degree title,
     • your specialization, or
     • your portfolio / internships / work experience?
5. Career changers’ experience
   • Has anyone here transitioned into planning from a non-planning background (like business, humanities, etc.)?
   • What was the hardest part of the transition?
   • Is there anything you wish you had known before starting a planning degree?
6. Internships, co-ops, and networking
   • How crucial are internships, co-ops, or practicum projects for landing a first planning job?
   • Any tips on how someone new to the field can start building a network (online communities, professional associations, volunteering, etc.)?
7. Would you recommend this move?
   • Given where the field is heading, would you recommend someone with my background pursue a Master’s in Planning?
   • If not, are there related fields you’d suggest looking into instead (public policy, economic development, real estate, sustainability, etc.)?

I’m trying to be realistic and avoid doing another degree that doesn’t translate into real opportunities, so direct and experience-based responses are very welcome.

Thanks in advance to anyone who’s willing to share their perspective.

I've noticed that many newer public spaces prioritize open layouts and modern aesthetics, but often seem to overlook basic comfort, like shade, benches, and greenery.

I understand the need for flexible spaces that can accommodate events, but shouldn't the main goal be creating places where people actually want to spend time?

What do you think makes a public plaza genuinely inviting rather than just visually appealing?

I was bored and hopped on Google street view in Hungary but noticed that the neighborhoods really remind me of Japan. I watch a lot of Japan360 neighborhood walks and drew parallels with the street width and modern housing architecture. I’m from the U.S. so it could just be very different to me. I’m wondering what anyone else thinks?

(Oh and btw the last pic was from Slovakia not Hungary)

Spanning over 1,000km, this dedicated bike path network is designed to allow safe cross-country cycling and support everyday leisure activities for citizens.

CityNerd visits Philadelphia, a city unlike any other US city in its character, walkability, and urban design.

The Renaissance was a pivotal period of architectural, city and monument design. The creativity and will of the time drove a fundamental change in the very meaning of architecture and art. What was brought to life in this period still today exists as a signature of the excellence in design, construction and city view.  

There have been other periods where architecture, art and city design brought a transition in thinking, as well as visuality to a period in history. We, today, reflect back on these periods as the building blocks of the human experience and the visuality of the past period. Yet as we look at city design today, architecture and the overall constructive process, are we ready to usher in a new Renaissance? Yet, as we now live in a much more digitized and technologically driven time, is  there the ability to construct architecture that can address both the wonder of unique visuality, the functionality of the everyday and the culture configurations today.

It feels it will be a long reach to all of a sudden have a new period of optimal design and punctuality, as the economics of today seem to fragment the thought of a new Renaissance.
Man today lives in two realms, the real and the digital, and as such the focus on a spectacular outer world are more limited.

Both modernist and traditional architecture are making their cases for a new and exciting time.  We can hope that the creativity and technical knowhow of professionals in both these fields will find a way in which to deliver a new and exciting structural presence that will have the ability to affect those coming generations from now. 

🫶

Hello. I am considering a masters in urban design, however, from reading other posts the consensus seems to be an urban design masters is too niche or useless, and it’s better to do a masters in planning or landscape architecture. While I can do a masters in planning, I am much more drawn to urban design and I want to improve my design skills.

The specific masters program i’m considering is accredited by the PIA and we do a lot of the classes urban planners do, I would also be able to be a registered planner it seems. Would employers regard it the same as an urban planning masters then? And would i still be as eligible for any urban planning jobs?

I’m also interested in transport and design, is there much room for urban designers to work in transport?

Montreal's RESO network is one thing that comes to mind, but are there are others? Are there places that have extensive public greenhouses for instance? Interesting district heating measures? I'm thinking of not just long and gray winters like much of coastal northern Europe, but places that have long stretches of freezing temperatures.

Key features:

• It is designated as and clearly is a main cycle route,
• Residential - there is a bit of mixed use here which is fine,
• Where through motor traffic has been removed,
• Where cycle traffic flow is much higher than motor traffic,
• A speed limit of 30 kp/h (20 mph)