UN Habitat III pushes “compact cities”

By |2016-10-18T11:39:31+00:00October 18th, 2016|Environment|58 Comments

In a world repeatedly described as under threat from innumerable challenges, including income inequality, inadequate urban infrastructure, discrimination against minorities of every stripe, and climate change, participants at the UN’s Habitat III conference in Quito, Ecuador were told that comprehensive planning aimed at densely concentrating people in urban areas offered the best way  forward to a “sustainable” future.

Addressing Habitat III on the conference’s first day, Serge Salat, director of the Urban Morphology Lab in France, said compact cities with residents living as close as possible to public transportation should be the goal of urban planners. He noted that ready access to public transportation would mean residents would no longer need cars to take them to work and recreation. This, he added, would make forward-looking cities leaders in the fight against climate change. Salat’s panel at Habitat III discussed green solutions to climate change and other urban problems. Salat, it should be noted is an adviser to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (IPCC_.

Creating Open Spaces and Wild Areas

According to Salat, the city all should embrace as a role model is Stockholm, Sweden. Stockholm, he noted, has created open space “buffer zones” – essentially parkland – running all through it. Just beyond the open space are areas set aside for wildlife, what he termed “wilderness corridors.” With few exceptions, the only place where residential and commercial property is available is in Stockholm proper.

In other words, by making land off limits for people to live and work, they will have little choice but to settle in densely populated urban areas. If parents prefer raising a family in a suburban environment, they will have to think again. Under this scheme, central planners will stack the deck in favor of compact cities.

The New Urban Agenda and the World’s Poor

Welcome to Habitat III’s “New Urban Agenda.” UN functionaries, green NGOs, and their allies in national governments want to see this top-down, globalized agenda imposed around the world.

During an opening of the Habitat III plenary session, speakers constantly said that the world’s poor are “the most vulnerable.” They’re right. But what they refuse to see is that their schemes will put the poor at even greater risk. Limiting the amount of land that is available for homes drives up the cost of housing. Promoting unreliable and unaffordable renewable energy drives up the cost of electricity. In both cases, it’s the poor who end up on the short end of the stick.


  1. Catbird October 18, 2016 at 12:33 PM


  2. Bob Blackthorne October 18, 2016 at 2:27 PM

    So, WE are to be under the thumb of the Third world countries who will instruct US as to how we may live, and WHERE? And, what, are we to bulldoze our suburbs and force suburbanites to move into high-rise tenements “mixing” in unemployables on Welfare, and who have NO EDUCATION, no job skills, breed like rats, and are the creators of gang violence and drug wars? Guess what? I “AIN’T” gonna go along with it! THIS scenario is what OUR Leftist, Liberal politicians hope for in order to have TOTAL “control” over us! It isn’t enough that OUR leaders give away hundreds of BILLIONS of OUR dollars to FOREIGN countries while we have our cities crumbling into dust and we have rampaging “turf” wars in every major city! Get ready, folks! Lock and LOAD! It MAY come to a new and complete revolution before our exalted “leaders” come to realize we will do whatever we have to to thwart THEIR Communistic agenda!

    • KLH6 October 19, 2016 at 11:03 AM

      I forsee a civil war ir revolution coming. I want the government out of my life. I pay taxes. Just let me live in peace. I don’t suppose secularists wonder why the earth was created-for humans to enjoy & take care of. Not for us to sit in a concrete jungle & look at land we can’t touch.

  3. Roguewave1 October 18, 2016 at 3:11 PM

    I am so thankful for these brilliant thinkers because I know that I cannot plan my own life without their beneficent help. I spit on my parents’ memory for rearing me in the selfish suburban environment of my youth. What was I thinking when I bought my farm and reared my children there. I am ashamed to have turned my back on the collective of the city.

  4. jlar52 October 18, 2016 at 4:02 PM

    This is the ” One World Order” that Secretary Clinton wishes upon the human race. If she becomes presidend of the US , that is surely where she will take us . It is already coming about in many parts of the world , as stated in this articall . The US goverment is taking over lands in the west now , making many ereas of un-inhabated land off limits to human traffic and waylaying the ecconommy to push people out of rural area’s . It is happening now and is well know as AGENDA 21. If we dont put a stop to this crap it will be upon us very soon ……..ELLECT TRUMP for a free world .

    • JRuss October 18, 2016 at 10:23 PM

      You are exactly right. In addition, both Hillary, Obama and Gov. Brown strongly support population reduction as is required by Agenda 21/30 and is implemented in the U.S. Eugenics Program. http://useugenics.FarTooMuch.Info

      • jazames October 19, 2016 at 12:42 AM

        they are all a bunch of sell out america rat bastards

    • KLH6 October 19, 2016 at 10:58 AM

      I just mentioned Agenda 21. Scary. The most scary is most people can’t see where this road leads. I, for one, have no desire to live in such a world. I live in west. By not touching precious fallen trees we are prone to wildfires every few years. Yes, government does a great job! Let all the immigrants come in. When all the taxpayers are shoved out, there will be no money.

  5. Manfred October 18, 2016 at 4:09 PM

    Ignore history at your peril.
    The cities of yore concentrated people in small areas. These became known as ‘slums’. One answer, reduce them to green fields and create a community elsewhere with space and greenery. I’m not sure this necessarily worked so well either. Almost certainly though, keeping meddlesome unelectable UN bureaucracy, those thinly clad eco-Marxists out of our lives is key to future prosperity, a flourishing culture, health and longevity.

  6. Tuxedo_Plowboy October 18, 2016 at 6:51 PM

    Hillary is waiting to make this all happen. Hillary for Prison 2016!!!

  7. Le Fox October 18, 2016 at 7:14 PM

    I wonder if Salat has ever considered that those ‘green’ cities are going to still emit CO2 when they are mined and built. Raw materials don’t come out of thing air. Besides, Sweden’s example of untouched wilderness is going to change due to them needing to build another Stockholm due to its growing refugee crisis. Has anyone bothered to ask how that crisis has contributed to CO2 rise?

    It’s very nice for these folks to lecture us and to get us to waste our money in a non-problem while they emit more CO2 travelling to and fro their destinations than we do in a gridlock. Such hypocrisy.

  8. jimdarnall October 18, 2016 at 7:20 PM

    The UN needs to stay out of other nation’s business. They have no right to try and control the way people live in their own countries . They want a one world government, like Obama. Power and control has always been the mindset of the left when in fact most people just want to be left alone. America, if Clinton becomes president, will be the last free nation that will fall. Vote Trump if you want to stay a free nation. You don’t have to like him but you better support him. There is no one left willing to fight for a free America but Trump.

    • JRuss October 18, 2016 at 10:56 PM

      To late: As I remember Obama has already given National Parks to the United Nations. In the NWO government own everything, air, water, land, food, housing, medicine, money, education and even the NWO religion. Remember that Agenda was published by Lucid Trust [formally called Lucifer Trust] which is appropriate for an entity that wants absolute control. “money” exits only as digits in the RFID in your right hand. As I remember, housing units are 700 square feet, one door to the common hall, one window at the opposite end. 20 ft wide & 35 feet long. 3 very small bedrooms, a bathroom, and a kitchenette/family room. Available power is 120V 50A. Use it wisely. Don’t even think of using the microwave and toaster at the same time.

      • KLH6 October 19, 2016 at 11:07 AM

        These idiots have apparently never been to places like Wyoming. High speed rail built to go 500 miles between little towns. We’re very independent in west.

      • DavidAppell October 19, 2016 at 8:27 PM

        JRuss wrote:
        “As I remember Obama has already given National Parks to the United Nations.”

        What the hell are you talking about????

        • JRuss October 20, 2016 at 4:52 AM

          I suggest you Google “Obama give national parks to United Nations.” You will have many links to follow. The exception is Yellowstone which he sold to China. Do your homework. Obama has also sold some Federal land to China. He has also given back to Russia Alaska Islands closest to Russia when oil was found there. I have also found other unbelievable “executive orders”. Obama does NOT love the United States.

          • Elizabeth Rink October 20, 2016 at 9:53 PM

            President Carter was the one who started signing over National Parks I think. It happened decades ago. Alex Jones has good documentaries about it.

          • DavidAppell October 21, 2016 at 2:39 AM

            “The exception is Yellowstone which he sold to China.”

            You are a first class whack-job.

    • Bob Armstrong October 19, 2016 at 5:36 PM

      Vote Johnson+Weld — one mark to crush the suicidally corrupt Duopoly .

      • jimdarnall October 19, 2016 at 7:00 PM

        Sadly my friend all that would do is guarantee Hillary as president.

        • Bob Armstrong October 19, 2016 at 7:21 PM

          Overall , they seem to be taking more from cruel Hillary .
          But , generally , it’s the #neverTrumpers and the #neverHilaryers who sit there dazed as if there were not a FAR more competent and honest choice just sense mark away . If all those appropriately disgusted people just vote against both , our country will be restored to the libertarian roots which can be summed up as Individual Freedom and Responsibility .

        • DavidAppell October 19, 2016 at 8:26 PM

          This is the twit Bob Armstrong supports for president:


      • DavidAppell October 19, 2016 at 8:30 PM
  9. a2plusb2 October 18, 2016 at 7:21 PM

    The Greens have an answer to Bonner Cohen’s last statement. With a sufficient amount of ideal socialism, the interests of the poor come first, workers come first. The bourgeois (French for nouveau rich city dwellers) are subordinated to putting the interests of the people first.
    — That is high sounding aspiration. Actuals may vary.

    • James in Texas October 18, 2016 at 8:04 PM

      Sounds a bunch like the USSR, and look how well that worked for them! By the way the workers and the poor are the same folks in this system. Only three levels of peoples, workers, poor folks and elites!

      • DavidAppell October 19, 2016 at 8:30 PM

        How do you like your own socialism?

        • James in Texas October 20, 2016 at 3:00 PM

          And, that would be what?

          • DavidAppell October 21, 2016 at 2:38 AM

            Do you have a home mortgage?
            Do you get health insurance from your employer?
            Do you get mail from the US post office?
            Does the US military defend you?
            Do you rely on the city and state police forces?

            • James in Texas October 21, 2016 at 8:37 AM

              Yep, some of these things I “have” available But, I also pay for these things and have paid for them my entire adult life. The government gives no one anything until they first take money from all to provide for the programs “They” have made into an requirement by law! Then the government “discriminates” against some people and gives freely to others! The one and only real thing the Federal government is “required to do for the peoples is the defense of the nation. All others things not mentioned in the Constitution is the responsibility of the states. If you feel that socialism is the way to go, Europe and several other countries are awaiting your arrival! Not for me!

              • DavidAppell October 26, 2016 at 5:46 PM

                If you have a home mortgage, you get a huge housing subsidy from the govt — tax deduction of home mortgage interest.

                If you get health benefits from your employer — a form of income — the govt does not tax you on that.

                How much do you estimate these save you every year?

                • James in Texas October 28, 2016 at 12:55 PM

                  Well, to start with, that would be none of your business. Same would apply to you as to me! But if it is all that important to you, have you asked Bill & Hilliary and Obama & Michelle these questions. None of us wrote the tax codes, we just learn to live with them and do what is allowed, Period!

                  • DavidAppell October 30, 2016 at 11:26 PM

                    I’m betting you DID get a huge subsidy on your home mortgage — worth tens of thousands of dollars — and don’t like admitting it.

                    • James in Texas October 31, 2016 at 8:14 AM

                      Just as soon as you post all of your tax subsidies on the internet, I will then know that you are just another Liberal that believes in the fairy tales putforth by those who want nothing but everything you have to give to someone else! The tax codes allow anyone/everyone the right to deduct their mortgage interest, you, me, everyone! I have no employer others than myself and I just can’t find what it is you are so upset about! When did you question the Clinton’s and Obama’s about their taxes?

  10. wally12 October 18, 2016 at 11:41 PM

    The agenda of the UN and those who push for agenda 21, and those who promote the taxing of fossil fuels under the lie that a reduction of CO2 will result in saving the earth must be resisted by all informed citizens of the world. That means that countries that are poor and uninformed and have natural weather events that endanger their existence need to be educated by the real facts. Those facts appear in the C fact articles that it is not climate change that is the problem. Rather it is their location relative to flooding and other natural disasters such as dry and wet spells etc. Places such as the Maldives islands that are only 8 feet above sea level and have and will continually be subjected to flooding due to sea surges and not because of CO2 increases. These locations will experience sea level rises that have been recorded to be 7 inches per century. Thus, instead of believing that reduced CO2 levels will save them, they need to take preventive measures which may include dikes and levies or the actual abandonment of their island once the sea rises to an unlivable height. Most of these poor countries have joined the propaganda that CO2 is the driver of warming because the promise or bribe that a tax on fossil fuels will result in a redistribution of wealth from industrialized nations to poorer nations. They are in for a surprise since any funds collected from the rich nations will be redistributed to the UN, the politicians and green energy corporations and of course finally to poor nation politicians. The poor will remain poor and the middle class will become serfs to the governments.

  11. Duane L Petersen October 19, 2016 at 12:46 AM

    Why dose not this group of morons just get to the nut cutting and start producing neutron bombs and kill 2/3 of the people on earth. After all that is their real end game. These educated iodates have been pushing for the removal of the virus Man since the 1950s as they “think” we are an infection on earth when the only truth is that these morons are the real danger to a sustainable habitat.

  12. Kicker October 19, 2016 at 12:51 AM

    You won’t have to worry about the impact on the poor. Population growth will be limited and those who are not needed in the sustainability formula will be eliminated. They will be prevented from reproduction and over time will simply die out. They will also be offered incentives for sterilization and life termination. Moreover income equality will be forced upon us and there will not be any poor. We will all be equal partners in the collective.

    • KLH6 October 19, 2016 at 11:11 AM

      Most of Europeans (excluding Muslims) aren ‘t even replacing population. I think a country needs 1.9 or 2.2 children per family or their country will die out. No fear, we’ll replace with Muslims & go back to 7th century where they seem to want to live. Right where they started.

  13. Kicker October 19, 2016 at 12:55 AM

    This plan/goal is essentially Agenda 21. UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. For more information see: http://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/

    • AllenBarclayAllen October 19, 2016 at 4:03 PM

      Vote Trump and kick global 21 out ! It is written the beast shall hate the whore and make her desolate ! The beast is the IRS ! THE WHORE is the united Nation the EU and every one that represents UN Agenda 21 sustainability !
      Here’s a hint Russia hates her ! China hates her ! The Lord of host hates her ,and all of her plans to do to us are going to be done to her ,just like it was done to pharaoh Ramsey’s in ! Moses time ! So they made these plans to march Republicans , church people , and the Jews into the gas chamber again to set up their Babylon 666 did they ! Well the Lord of host was listening ,and every thing they speek about Gods chosen is going to be done to them ,for a greater than Moses is comeing back ! A prophet Savior king of israel who Moses spoke of is COMMING ?

    • Robert October 21, 2016 at 11:37 AM

      Note the possibility of Koch $$ involved.

  14. KLH6 October 19, 2016 at 10:52 AM

    Anybody read Glen Beck’s Agenda 21? I read the second book because the library had that one. It was very good even though it was fiction. People wrre all herded into camps surrounded by high security & guards. All the land, forests & animals were free to roam. I found it to be very scary because I knew that is where the globalists are heading. Hillary is one & so is Obama. Working out great, isn’t it. But when secularists take over, this is the result. God gave man dominion over land, animals, etc. They were put here for their use. Thanks to pagans, it’s been flipped-humans are less valuable. We’re expendable. I once heard a PETA person say the life of an ant is as worthwhile as a human. Boy is this world a screwed up mess. It’s so ludicrous what we’ve allowed to happen to us.

    • DavidAppell October 19, 2016 at 8:28 PM

      OK: Why *isn’t* the life of a nonhuman animal worth as much as a human animal?

      • KLH6 October 19, 2016 at 9:39 PM

        Read Agenda 21 & tell me if that’s a world you want to live in. So your children’s lives are less valuable than a rats? I believe in God who gave us dominion over all the earth.

        • DavidAppell October 19, 2016 at 10:58 PM

          Yes, I very much do want to live in world where all sentient life has equal value and is respected equally.

          You only think humans are superior because you’re a human. If you were some other animal, you certainly wouldn’t think that, nor would you think that some fictitious “god” was created in other than your image.

          • KLH6 October 20, 2016 at 7:56 AM

            You & I have nothing further to discuss. No, I’m not paranoid but I have a different belief system. We’ll never agree on anything. I’m not clueless. I worked 38 years as an RN. I spent the last 20 on busy cardiac floors. So, I’ve seen a lot of the intricacies of the human body. I’ve witnessed the best & worst of humans. I also know when it’s a waste of time to continue a discussion. Good-bye.

            • DavidAppell October 21, 2016 at 2:38 AM

              Sorry you can’t see the value in all sentient life, and that you’re not superior to any of it.

        • DavidAppell October 20, 2016 at 12:08 AM

          Agenda 21 has nothing — NOTHING WHATSOEVER — to do with US governance.

          You people are profoundly paranoid.

        • Robert October 21, 2016 at 11:21 AM

          Abebooks has copies available starting at $3.47 w ‘free’ shipping.
          Essentially, you are paying more for the envelope than the book….
          There’s value!

          • KLH6 October 21, 2016 at 6:04 PM

            Thanks for info. I read Agenda21 months ago. Got it from our library. Our library will also order books if they think others will read them. I try to buy only one book a month. Since my health is shot & money is tight, my only entertainment is reading & TV. So I try to get most books from library. I did buy Killing the Rising Sun because grocery store had 40% off but I finished it too.

  15. Dano2 October 19, 2016 at 11:38 AM

    Agenda 21 KINSPEERCY!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111one




  16. Dano2 October 19, 2016 at 11:39 AM

    To fearful cons who are afraid of compact cities: don’t move to one.

    /basic thinkin through of stuff



  17. Bob Armstrong October 19, 2016 at 5:40 PM

    I left Manhattan when I could get ( line of sight microwave ) internet in Teller County , CO .

    The total dispersion of many branches of business says the future is in exactly the opposite direction .

  18. Frederick Colbourne October 20, 2016 at 4:31 AM

    In low income countries, densification is the most economic way ro provide urban water supply, sewerage, stormwater drainage and roads.

    In low-income countries, densification is the the only way to keep user charges for these services low enough to be affordable for families with income between $500 to about $1000 per month. Outside Western Europe, the US, Canada, Australia/NZ, Japan etc. a few billion people fit this description.

    I doubt there is any connection climate. There is probably no evidence because of the urban heat island effect. The claimed connection to climate seems to me a fairy tale told by activists for activists.

    Nevertheless, the existence of this fairy tale does not change the fact that the per capita cost of urban infrastructure and essential services declines as population density increases, at least up to density levels far greater than what we observe for most cities and suburbs in both developed and developing countries.

    Typical population densities in cities of most developing countries is far below typical densities in American cities of the same population size.

    (There are famous exceptions as I discovered when I lived in Cairo and Giza. Egypt was one of 18 countries where I have live and worked since 1960 in the Americas, Europe, Africa and Asia..)

    The richest countries have the least need for densification policies. And the poorest countries cannot afford them, which is one reason their urban densities are so low.

    The other,reason for low density is lack of large industrial and commercial enterprises. Ibadan, Nigeria comes to mind.

    Some middle income countries need to build vertically to protect agricultural producers as well as to reduce the cost of infrastructure and services.

    The average minimum average population density to aim for is about 50 persons per hectare, (20 persons per acre), to include all infrastructure and services. Residential; net density would probably need to reach 100-200 persons per hectare (40-80 per acre) to allow for roads, shops, schools, etc for the average to reach 50 p.p.Ha.

    Some cites such as Yerevan (Armenia) and Hanoi (Vietnam) have huge parks for which some adjustments would be made in calculating uban density. Dhaka in Bangladesh has vast areas set aside for military and government functions, also confusing this approach to urban design. For most urban places this approach is reasonably valid as a rule of thumb, a starting point.

    I have personal experience of living in a tropical Asian middle-income country that demonstrates the parameters given above can support luxury living.

    A luxury condo in a medium-density area has 275 M2 (2750 square feet with balconies) in an 11-storey building on land of 6000 M2 (60,000 square feet). Family size in our city is about 4 persons. So this residential land has a nominal residential density of 44 persons in 0.6 hectare, 1,5 acre. 58 persons per hectare, about 24 persons per acre.

    Typical densities for middle income people in this country would be double that figure and low-income density about 3 times. All would enjoy the same water supply, sanitation and garbage collection services. The high population densities mean the cost of these public services is affordable both for these families and the government.

    This is not so in some other countries in this region where densities are lower and incomes are lower as well.

    The authors of this article and many of the commentators seem not to understand that most of the world’s people do not have the wealth to support the American style of urban or suburban housing. And their governments cannot afford to supply infrastructure and services for free.

    A very large percentage of the world’s population does aspire to American-style living, even detached housing with gardens. But a very large proportion of the world’s population does not.

    Multi-family dwellings with shops within walking distance is enough for much of the world’s population, provided that adequate public infrastructure and services can be accessed at affordable prices. With densification this is achievable for many countries but even with densification is not is still not achievable for the lowest income countries.

    Climate alarmists seem to be piggy-backing on efforts to find feasible strategies for urban development.

    What they advance as their rationale is a fairy tale about climate. Do they know they are telling fairy tales? I am not sure. Richard Feynman warned that self-deception is the easiest trap of all.

  19. Robert October 21, 2016 at 11:35 AM

    Enter the paranoid world of ‘AGeNdA 20nE is comiNg ‘ for the entertainment.
    Or decorate your room w tinfoil…..

    • Dano2 October 22, 2016 at 10:29 AM

      It’s one of my favorite paranoid KINSPEERCYs.



Comments are closed.