A conversation with DeepSeek

Episode 1

It’s possible to plan for a town that produces communities that are healthier, happier, and less reliant on handouts. I believe that if you look after the children, the family will thrive because there will be a lot less pressure on parents and schools. The litmus test is: Can the kids walk to school? Can they meet together for informal, self directed play? Do the parents need to use a car to get to work and to purchase the basics or can they walk? Does our town plan meet a functionality test when viewed from a family perspective? What can we learn from experience elsewhere?

The entire world is urbanizing at a fast clip but none so fast as China. Nobody creates underground ‘Metro’ systems, highways, fast trains and tower apartments faster than China.

The WA state government is now building high density housing adjacent to transit nodes along rail lines. Will these be good places to live?

Where I live in Busselton there is a chronic shortage of affordable shelter. The current town plan, gazetted in 2014 is long overdue for revision. Many young people share houses on tiny residential blocks that were designed to be occupied by single families. This type of housing was once described a ‘standalone’. As blocks get smaller a more accurate description would be ‘stand-together’. Houses are being informally repurposed as flats based on the occupation of a bedroom and possibly an ensuite bathroom. Food is ordered in to avoid sharing the use of the kitchen and there are three or four cars parked outside. With a local population of less than 50,000 our roads are already congested. As we move to ‘stand on top of each other’ the congestion will increase. Is this focus on single use zoning for housing practical? Is there a better way to go?

Who better to ask about what it is like to live in an apartment tower than Deep Seek, the Chinese AI tool.

The questions I directed to Deep Seek are italicised and rendered ‘bold’. The answer from DeepSeek is provided in normal upright print.

Question 1 What is a typical floor plan in a high rise? Does every apartment get a view?

• The elevator bank, stairwells, and utility shafts (for plumbing and electricity) form a central core.

• Apartments are arranged around this core, with their main living spaces and windows facing the exterior.

• Typically, you will find 4 to 8 apartments per floor.

Not all units are created equal. Their size, price, and most importantly, their view, are strictly tiered.

1. The Premium “View Apartments”

   • Position: These are the largest units, typically 3-4 bedrooms, located at the corners or the “face” of the building pointing towards the best asset (a park, river, or the city skyline).

   • Layout: They often have a large, open-plan living/dining/kitchen area with a big balcony, facing the prime view. Bedrooms are also oriented to capture the view. These are the most expensive units on the market.

2. The Standard “Side-View Apartments”

   • Position: These 2-3 bedroom units are on the sides of the building.

   • Layout: They get a narrower, often lateral view. They might look out onto other buildings or a less impressive urban streetscape. The layout is more compartmentalized, with bedrooms and living rooms facing the same direction.

3. The “Darker” or “Lesser-View” Apartments

   • Position: These are the smallest units (1-bedroom or studios) located on the “back” of the building. This side is often deliberately positioned to face a less desirable direction (e.g., north, or towards a highway, factory, or a tight cluster of other buildings).

   • Layout: They are purely functional. They might have smaller windows and get less direct sunlight. Their “view” is often just the adjacent high-rise a few dozen meters away. These are the most “affordable” entry-point units.

Question 2 Is there more than apartment accommodation in a Chinese high rise tower. Is it mixed use? Is there a shopping centre? A clinic? A library, a school, a play space, a workshop. Are there restaurants or food stalls? Are deliveries made to the gatekeeper, the ground floor or to the apartment itself?

The short answer is yes, Chinese high-rise developments are almost always mixed-use, but the specific amenities vary greatly based on the size, age, and class of the development.

1. The “Podium” or “Pedestal” (裙楼, Qúnlóu)

This is the critical architectural feature. Most residential towers sit atop a multi-story base called a podium, which is dedicated to commercial and public functions.

Universal Features (in virtually every development):

Ground-Floor Retail: The entire ground floor facing the street will be a continuous strip of small shops: convenience stores (‘Bianlidian’), real estate agencies, pharmacies, small banks, milk tea shops, and casual eateries.

Property Management & Gatekeeper: There is always a management office and a security presence at the main entrance, controlling access and receiving parcels.

Very Common Features:

Supermarket or Fresh Food Market: Often in the basement or on the second floor of the podium.

Clinics: Small, private dental and general practice clinics are extremely common within the podium.

Restaurants: The podium will host a range of restaurants, from local noodle shops to larger, well-known chains. Their exhaust systems are designed to vent through the podium roof.

Kindergarten/Nursery: It is very common for a development to have a private kindergarten occupying a dedicated, often ground-floor, space with its own outdoor play area.

2. Larger Integrated Developments (更像一个综合体, More like a Complex)

In larger, master-planned communities, the integration is even deeper.

Shopping Malls: The podium can evolve into a full-fledged, multi-story shopping mall, directly connected to the residential towers above.

Schools: While a large public elementary school will be a separate structure, it is very often located within the superblock grounds, a short, safe walk from the towers.

Public Services: Higher-end developments might incorporate a public library branch, a community health center, or a police kiosk within their commercial podium.

3. Internal Amenities within the Tower**

The tower itself is not just apartments. You will often find:

Shared “Clubhouse” Space: Many developments have a shared floor (e.g., the “sky lobby” or a ground-floor area) with a gym, a children’s playroom, sometimes a small library or reading room, and spaces for community events.

Workshops & Hobby Rooms: This is rarer, but some newer, high-end developments are beginning to include shared spaces for hobbies, such as music rooms or workshops.

---

The Logistics: Deliveries and Daily Life

This is where the integrated model truly shines and defines modern urban living.

1. Food & E-commerce Deliveries: To Your Door

This is a cornerstone of urban convenience. The system is incredibly efficient:

Meituan/Ele.me (Food Delivery): Couriers have full access to the complex and the building. They will ride the elevator directly to your apartment door. There is no picking up food at a gate.

Taobao/JD.com (E-commerce): Same principle. Parcels are delivered directly to your door if you are home.

The “Parcel Problem”: If you are not home, this is where the system adapts. The courier will NOT typically leave the parcel with the security guard. Instead, they will:

* Leave it at your door (increasingly common, with low theft rates).

* Arrange a second delivery attempt.

* Take it to a centralized ‘Parcel Locker Bank’ within the complex. These intelligent lockers (e.g., from Hive Box 丰巢) are ubiquitous. You receive a code and can pick up your parcel 24/7.

2. The “Gatekeeper” (Security) Role**

The security guards (Bao’an) are not typically receptionists. Their role is:

Access Control: Monitoring who enters the complex and the building lobbies.

Traffic Flow: Managing vehicles in the drop-off area.

Surveillance and Safety.

Information: They might hold a spare key for you or take in a very large, pre-arranged delivery, but they are not a standard package receipt service for hundreds of residents.

Summary: The Vertical City

So, to answer your questions directly:

Is it mixed-use? Yes, absolutely. The podium model ensures this.

Is there a shopping centre? Often, especially in larger developments.

A clinic? Very frequently.

A library? Sometimes, as a shared clubhouse amenity or a public branch.

A school? A kindergarten, very often. A larger school is usually within the superblock.

A play space? Yes, both dedicated indoor rooms and outdoor playgrounds in the communal area.

A workshop? Rare, but a sign of the next generation of luxury developments.**

Restaurants or food stalls? Extensively, in the podium.

Deliveries? Overwhelmingly, directly to the apartment door or to a parcel locker.

The Chinese high-rise tower is not just a place to sleep; it is the central node of a highly convenient, self-contained urban life. This integrated model is the key to understanding how these dense cities function so efficiently for daily needs.

Question 3 To what extent is the growth in population of first tier cities been accommodated by adding housing that is serviced by underground mass transit versus above ground.

Of course. This is an excellent and complex question that gets to the heart of modern urban development. The growth in population of first-tier cities globally has been accommodated by a combination of both underground mass transit-serviced housing and above-ground expansion, but the dominant and most critical strategy has overwhelmingly been focusing new housing along underground mass transit corridors.

Here’s a detailed breakdown of the extent to which each mode is used, the reasons behind the strategies, and the challenges involved.

The Dominant Strategy: Underground Mass Transit-Led Development

For most first-tier cities (e.g., New York, London, Tokyo, Shanghai, Beijing), the primary and most sustainable model for accommodating growth is Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) centered on underground rail systems (metros/subways).

Why Underground Transit is the Centerpiece:

1. Scarcity of Space: The cores of first-tier cities are already densely built up. Underground transit is the only way to add high-capacity, high-frequency service without demolishing existing infrastructure or seizing valuable surface land.

2. Speed and Reliability: Subways are not subject to street-level traffic congestion, making them the fastest and most reliable way to move millions of people. This makes distant housing viable for commuters.

3. Unlocking Land Value: The single most powerful tool for adding housing is to build it near subway stations. Governments and developers actively use new transit lines to:

Increase Density: Allow for much higher Floor Area Ratios (FAR) around stations, enabling the construction of high-rise residential towers.

Develop Brownfield Sites: Former industrial lands, railyards, and underutilized areas are repurposed into massive new mixed-use districts, with the subway connection making them desirable. (e.g., Hudson Yards in NYC, King’s Cross in London).

Finance Infrastructure: Cities often use value-capture taxes or direct partnerships with developers who build the stations/line in exchange for air rights to build housing and offices above.

Extent of Accommodation:

In cities like London, Paris, and New York, virtually all significant new housing growth in the central and inner areas is explicitly tied to existing underground stations. Extensions of lines (like London’s Northern Line Extension to Nine Elms) are built for the primary purpose of servicing and enabling major new housing developments.

In Chinese first-tier cities like Shanghai and Beijing, the strategy is even more explicit. The government builds new metro lines far ahead of demand into what were previously rural or suburban areas. This state-driven development immediately triggers a massive boom in high-density residential construction around the new stations, effectively creating new urban sub-centers.

The Role of Above-Ground Transit and Expansion

While underground transit is the star, above-ground solutions play a crucial and complementary role.

1. Above-Ground Heavy Rail (Commuter Rail):

Function: These systems connect the suburbs and exurbs to the central city’s core, where passengers transfer to the underground metro network.

Accommodation Role: They facilitate population growth in a wider metropolitan area. Housing in these “commuter towns” is heavily reliant on these above-ground lines. For example, the Long Island Rail Road (NYC), the RER (Paris), and the JR lines (Tokyo) are essential for housing the metropolitan population.

2. Light Rail Transit (LRT) & Streetcars:

Function: These are lower-capacity systems that often run at street level or on dedicated rights-of-way. They are used to connect neighborhoods within the city and feed into heavier rail hubs.

Accommodation Role: They are instrumental in intensifying inner-suburbs and secondary corridors. Cities like Toronto and Berlin use LRT to add density along aging arterial roads without the extreme cost of tunneling, thus adding housing capacity in the “missing middle” density range.

3. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT):

Function: A bus-based system with dedicated lanes, giving it rail-like characteristics at a lower cost.

Accommodation Role: BRT is a key tool for adding transit service to corridors that cannot justify the expense of a rail line. It allows cities to quickly improve transit access and encourage higher-density housing along these routes. It’s a primary tool in many growing cities in Asia and Latin America.

Comparative Analysis: Extent and Trade-Offs

Features: Underground Metro | Above-Ground Rail (Commuter/LRT)

Primary Role: High-density core service & radial expansion. Connecting suburbs & intensifying secondary corridors.

Housing Type Enabled very high-density (towers, mid-rises). Medium to high-density (mid-rises, townhouses).

Cost Extremely high ($200M-$1B+ per km). High (Commuter Rail) to Moderate (LRT).

Speed/Capacity Very high speed and capacity. High (Commuter), Moderate (LRT).

Spatial Impact Unlocks deep, 3D urban land. Follows existing rail/road corridors.

Conclusion: To What Extent?

The growth in first-tier cities is accommodated by a hierarchical and integrated approach, but the center of gravity is firmly on underground transit.

1. Primary Extent: The majority of high-density, centrally-located housing growth is directly serviced by and dependent on underground mass transit. It is the essential backbone without which this level of densification would be impossible due to crippling congestion. The planning paradigm is Transit First, where new housing is deliberately clustered around new or existing underground stations.

2. Secondary Extent: Above-ground transit systems (commuter rail, LRT, BRT) accommodate a massive portion of the population, but typically at lower densities and in the wider metropolitan region. They are the supporting network that makes the entire metropolitan area function, housing people who cannot live directly on a subway line.

In essence, the underground metro system acts as the primary skeleton of the city, defining the most valuable and dense nodes for housing. Above-ground transit forms the secondary ribs and limbs, extending the city’s reach and filling in the gaps. For a first-tier city to grow sustainably, it cannot rely on one over the other; it requires both, with the underground system bearing the heaviest load of core urban densification.

Question 4 You state: This state-driven development immediately triggers a massive boom in high-density residential construction around the new stations, effectively creating new urban sub-centers.

You’ve pinpointed the absolute core mechanism of urban growth in many modern Chinese first-tier cities, and it’s a strategy that stands in stark contrast to the more organic or market-led development seen in some Western cities.

Let me break down exactly how this “state-driven development trigger” works, because it’s a masterclass in centralized urban planning.

The Mechanism: A Deliberate Two-Step Process

This isn’t a happy accident; it’s a calculated cycle engineered by the municipal government.

Step 1: The State’s Massive Bet: Building Transit Ahead of Demand

The city government (through its state-owned rail and construction companies) decides to extend a metro line, often far into the urban periphery, agricultural land, or a previously underdeveloped area.

This is an enormous financial gamble. A kilometer of subway can cost billions of RMB. The state makes this bet knowing the direct fare revenue will never cover the cost.

The goal is not to serve an existing population, but to create the conditions for a new one.

Step 2: Unlocking and Monetizing the Land

This is the critical part. In China, all urban land is owned by the state. The moment a new metro station is announced, the land around it instantly becomes astronomically more valuable.

The government then leases this now prime land to real estate developers at a high price. This land sales revenue is a primary method for the government to recoup its massive investment in the subway infrastructure.

The government’s master plan for these areas zones them explicitly for high-density, mixed-use development (residential towers, office buildings, shopping malls).

The “Massive Boom” in Action

With the infrastructure in place and the land sold, the trigger is pulled:

1. Developer Frenzy: Developers compete for parcels, knowing that “metro adjacency” is the single biggest selling point for Chinese homebuyers and commercial tenants. They build at maximum allowed density to maximize returns.

2. Consumer Confidence: People are willing to buy apartments and move to these new areas precisely because the permanent, high-capacity transit link is already there, not just a promise. This reduces the perceived risk immensely.

3. Creation of Sub-Centers: Unlike suburban sprawl, the development is hyper-concentrated. You don’t get a gradual drop in density; you get a “volcano” of high-rises right at the station, creating a dense, walkable node that functions as a semi-autonomous urban center with its own jobs, services, and housing, reducing the burden on the historic city core.

Contrast with Other Models:

North America: Development is often market-led. A neighborhood becomes desirable, then traffic becomes a problem, and then there is a long political battle to ‘maybe’ add transit (e.g., streetcars in Toronto, subway debates in LA). The sequence is the opposite.

Europe: While more planned, transit expansion is often to serve existing, historic towns or to redevelop specific brownfield sites, rather than creating entirely new urban districts from farmland on such a massive scale.

In summary, your quoted statement describes a powerful positive feedback loop engineered by the state:

State invests in Metro → Land value soars → State sells land to fund metro → Developers build dense housing/commercial → People and jobs move in → New sub-center is created.

This model is the reason Chinese first-tier cities have been able to absorb tens of millions of new residents while largely avoiding the crippling traffic congestion that plagues other megacities at a similar stage of growth. The housing and the transit are two sides of the same, state-issued coin.

My comment:

In Australia, with the advent of town planning pre-existing mixed use gave way to zoning that has produced single use urban sprawl. This is convenient for developers. Its not convenient for residents who must have cars to meet a multitude of needs not catered for locally. That’s the single use aspect. That suited a rich person who sought to avoid the congestion in the core of an industrializing city who employed servants to look after him.

Now consider those who are not rich enough to afford a block large enough to provide green space in the vicinity of a home. In Australia we build standalone single story housing on ever smaller blocks, each fronting a road. We drive our numerous cars up to the front door. There is not a café, a convenience store or a clinic in sight. The kids can’t walk to school. There is unlikely to be space for small kids to organise their own play informally. This is not family friendly. Is it any wonder that the birth rate has fallen below replacement levels. Even though people are living longer, we are highly dependant on immigrants to keep the place running. And the final crunch point is staring us in the face. The upcoming generations cannot afford the housing that is on offer, despite its unattractive budget based appearance. In countries like the US where these tendencies are even more extreme, drug use is rife, people are obese and unhealthy and the span of a human life is contracting

There is a lot of emphasis on socializing and relationships in Chinese culture. It is not uncommon for neighbors to greet each other and strike up conversations in common areas such as elevators, hallways, cafes, supermarkets and communal gardens. This and the range of additional features provided in Chinese high rise makes for a stronger community focus that is rarely if ever seen in Aussie Suburbs. We in Australia depend on active volunteers to bring us together, perhaps a church or a football club, and they may be few and far between.

Plainly, the market for housing in Australia is discombobulated. The median consumer is being stuffed. He and she, is in a pot that is gradually and remorselessly being brought to the boil. Do we live in a society where those who plan for our future are conscious of and willing to cater for our needs? Superficially yes, but practically speaking no.