The best cities I've visited in America have been planned, ironically. New York City follows century-old grids. Savannah maintains park squares first laid out in the early 18th century. Washington DC was designed and built from nothing. Perhaps these don't match the definition of Euro-style central planning however.

I don't think it's ironic at all. I think the poster you are responding to is making the point that better city planning leads to better cities, but that America is opposed to central planning. You're pointing out the planned cities that made it in are great.

Not at all. American cities have extensive central planning that restricts what can be built.

Most areas have zoning that only allow single family houses and requires a minimum lot size that is quite large.

Isn't planning the same as the zoning people are complaining about?

I think this is the heart of it. In a way this cuts to the heart of America itself, both its successes and failures.