Current Events > Why is the internet so obsessed with "walkable" cities

(+) Yeah! (+)

bigblu89 posted...

They're market priced.

If they go up for sale and people are willing to buy them, are they really "jacked up"?

That's a no on being priced for the neighborhood, then.

Coulda just said that.

bigblu89 posted...

But you can't have it both ways, and this isn't me arguing, just making a point.

Some company comes in and buys up an abandoned apartment complex, fixes it up, and then people complain, even if they are apartments that are built for ownership.

Mainly becasue anything being sold by a "corporation" is seen as evil.

I agree this is bad and is an issue I have with progressives. Developers and corporations build housing..you can't reflexively hate them!

But yes, many people are essentially NIMBYS, regardless of being on the left or the right, and don't actually like increased housing and large number of people, and many have different reasons, some being bad and some being good. So while I support many policies to increase density, I am well aware they are not actually popular...yet. But we should still legalize those policies.

emblem-man posted...

Developers and corporations build housing

For whom?

Like, I'm an ENORMOUS fan of what the Squamish are doing with their Vancouver development project, because said housing is actually priced for the people in the area.

lydiaquayle posted...

Exactly. Imagine if these people actually visited European cities and had to walk around everywhere.

My wife and I just got back from Europe. We walked a ton while sightseeing and stuff and were dying at the end of pretty much every day. Then I was surfing the Euro subreddits and they were all laughing at how Americans can't walk for very long and I was like "fuck, that's me"

Also y'all are acting like the "but what if I need to carry more than a backpack and shopping bag worth of stuff" isn't a completely solved problem that doesn't require every single individual person owning a 20x9 foot truck.

DrizztLink posted...

That's a no on being priced for the neighborhood, then.

Coulda just said that.

I haven't had to buy any sort of real estate in literally 19 years so I know the game has changed, but if people are willing to pay for it, why would anyone charge LESS than what the market is dictating.

I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative about it, I'm truly not educated ion the subject.

How does "supply and demand" not apply here?

DrizztLink posted...

Are the apartments priced for people living in the area, or are they jacked way the fuck up?

Doesn't matter. More housing, even market rate housing, helps the housing crisis.

lydiaquayle posted...

Yes, they are. Because many of these apartments are bought up by rich people as investments, and then they just leave them empty, or rent them out to rich visitors.

That is not how it works!!

s0nicfan posted...

"You don't need a car" isn't the same as "we've made it impossible for you to have a car" which is why I brought up parking. Paying lip service to drivers while building infrastructure that makes it difficult to actually have a car isn't a practical solution unless the goal is to force people to give up cars because it's a 30 minute commute to where you can park it.

Yes, ultimately you have to prioritize something. Right now, cars are prioritized and all other forms are illegal. I simply think we should make both ideas legal, and let the market and people choose what they want.

theAteam posted...

My wife and I just got back from Europe. We walked a ton while sightseeing and stuff and were dying at the end of pretty much every day. Then I was surfing the Euro subreddits and they were all laughing at how Americans can't walk for very long and I was like "fuck, that's me"

I will admit though, walking around in Europe is great.
European weather and geography is arguably S-tier, and, imo, the #1 or #2 reason why the continent advanced faster than other regions in the world.

However, being forced to walk a few miles in humid Florida or Texas would be a death sentence for many.

lydiaquayle posted...

Exactly. Imagine if these people actually visited European cities and had to walk around everywhere.

If I visited Europe, I would make sure to ship my 2002 Hummer H1 along with me so I had something to drive. It gets about 9 miles to the gallon.

Noname13 posted...

Until you literally have to do anything besides walking to a restaurant. Groceries, going to work, literally going anywhere. Trains and buses take forever and most of the time filled with some of the worst RPG enemy encounters in society. My 17 minute drive to work would turn into an hour plus commute of walking and taking buses for no reason

You can thank zoning laws for that.

lydiaquayle posted...

European weather and geography is arguably S-tier

Bro, what's this shit?

By "Europe" did you mean "France"?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

In a walkable city, there would be motorized walkways, and paved roads, and covered areas that can address all of the things you just mentioned. Have you seen what they've done to many cities in Japan, Singapore, China, etc.? You can literally walk 2 miles around town without even setting foot on a sidewalk.

DrizztLink posted...

For whom?

Like, I'm an ENORMOUS fan of what the Squamish are doing with their Vancouver development project, because said housing is actually priced for the people in the area.

For everyone. Who builds subsidized homes? Developers do, with tax money. Best way to use less tax money to build more subsidized home is by making it easy for developers to build homes. Which is why we should rezone and reduce artificial barriers to home building.

Market rate housing helps also because it gives people who can afford them a place to live. Would you rather have new high income individuals to a city move to these new market rate homes, or would you rather them outbid the poor for a lower price tier home? I know which I'd prefer. Let the high income individuals blow their money on "luxury" homes! And also use tax money to subsidize affordable homes for others. You need both!

I feel like TC literally just doesn't understand the concept of a walkable city.

The grocery thing is a non-issue. When you can walk to the store in 2 minutes, you don't need buy 400 pounds of groceries to stock up for weeks in advance. Feel like a salad for dinner? Go to the store and buy salad stuff. It takes 2 minutes. That's the point. You can buy things fresh as and when you need them because it's no longer a major inconvenience to go to the store. You end up with better/fresher meals and you waste less food because you don't buy enough at once for it to go bad before it's used.

Going to work is also not an issue because, hey, it's a fucking walkable city. You can walk to work. That's the point. And the few buses the city might have for public transportation are more efficient and more reliable because there's far less traffic on the roads to cause problems. But again, the point is for it to be walkable. Ideally you don't need any transportation.

And of course your current 17 minute commute would turn into an hour of hassle. You don't live in a walkable city.

emblem-man posted...

Yes, ultimately you have to prioritize something. Right now, cars are prioritized and all other forms are illegal. I simply think we should make both ideas legal, and let the market and people choose what they want.

And that's fine, but there needs to be honesty in marketing. There are a lot of drawbacks to 15 minutes cities that people either pretend don't exist or just say vague things like "you can still have your car" while either consciously or otherwise omitting the part where these sorts of designs make it functionally impossible to do what they're claiming you can still do.

Sell it for what it is, the good and the bad. But I'm not going to buy into a fictional idea of this futuristic city that ignores the logistics of the real world and then jump behind that as if it's achievable.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

If I visited Europe, I would make sure to ship my 2002 Hummer H1 along with me so I had something to drive. It gets about 9 miles to the gallon.

And that would be a ridiculously silly idea that you would regret more or less immediately during your first day driving it.

emblem-man posted...

And also use tax money to subsidize affordable homes for others.

Can't. The tax subsidies for developers typically offer 10 to 25-year tax abatement holidays.

pinky0926 posted...

And that would be a ridiculously silly idea that you would regret more or less immediately during your first day driving it.

Nah, it's got pretty good off road capabilities.

emblem-man posted...

You need both!

And they aren't creating both.

That's my entire point.

DodogamaRayBrst posted...

Bro, what's this shit?
By "Europe" did you mean "France"?

France, Italy, Spain, Germany, Greece all have great temperate weather compared to the other regions of the world. When was the last time you heard of a hurricane or tornadoes killing 50 people in a European village?

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Nah, it's got pretty good off road capabilities.

Just wondering...what do you think europe is

pinky0926 posted...

Just wondering...what do you think europe is

A continent.

pinky0926 posted...

Just wondering...what do you think europe is

I'm not sure why people are taking him seriously.

Aristoph posted...

I feel like TC literally just doesn't understand the concept of a walkable city.

The grocery thing is a non-issue. When you can walk to the store in 2 minutes, you don't need buy 400 pounds of groceries to stock up for weeks in advance. Feel like a salad for dinner? Go to the store and buy salad stuff. It takes 2 minutes. That's the point. You can buy things fresh as and when you need them because it's no longer a major inconvenience to go to the store. You end up with better/fresher meals and you waste less food because you don't buy enough at once for it to go bad before it's used.

Going to work is also not an issue because, hey, it's a fucking walkable city. You can walk to work. That's the point. And the few buses the city might have for public transportation are more efficient and more reliable because there's far less traffic on the roads to cause problems. But again, the point is for it to be walkable. Ideally you don't need any transportation.

And of course your current 17 minute commute would turn into an hour of hassle. You don't live in a walkable city.

So if everyone can walk to work, were just to assume that all these companies only hire from the few thousand people that live within the city?

I really need to research walkable cities because this literally sounds like an impossible scenario. Or like one of those cities from the 1970s in the middle of nowhere, where everyone works at the factory and once that factory closed, the town just gets abandoned.

Having to walk everywhere when the weather's bad must suck. Wind, rain, heat, cold..

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Or how about just passing by a farmer's market while walking back from work? Instead of buying a month's worth of veggies and having 1/3 of it go bad, you only buy enough for the week, and ensure it will be fresh and healthy for your meals those days.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/148463ab.jpg

lydiaquayle posted...

Can't. The tax subsidies for developers typically offer 10 to 25-year tax abatement holidays.

Not sure what that means.

s0nicfan posted...

And that's fine, but there needs to be honesty in marketing. There are a lot of drawbacks to 15 minutes cities that people either pretend don't exist or just say vague things like "you can still have your car" while either consciously or otherwise omitting the part where these sorts of designs make it functionally impossible to do what they're claiming you can still do.

Sell it for what it is, the good and the bad. But I'm not going to buy into a fictional idea of this futuristic city that ignores the logistics of the real world and then jump behind that as if it's achievable.

It's not really a fictional idea is it? Outside of the US, you do have highly dense cities with good public transportation.

It won't work everywhere in the US, at all. But in the areas where it can be done, denser cities is more cost effective, efficient, and safer. But you are specifically talking about how some market the idea, and I agree that not everyone uses the best pros/cons and narratives about it.

lydiaquayle posted...

Or how about just passing by a farmer's market while walking back from work? Instead of buying a month's worth of veggies and having 1/3 of it go bad, you only buy enough for the week, and ensure it will be fresh and healthy for your meals those days.

I assume I can't get a McDonald's quarter pounder with cheese from a random European farmer's market, can I?

bigblu89 posted...

So if everyone can walk to work, were just to assume that all these companies only hire from the few thousand people that live within the city?

Few thousand? That's your bar for what makes a city these days?

3000 people barely qualifies as a rural town in America.

DrizztLink posted...

I'm not sure why people are taking him seriously.

I am having a lot of fun imagining an American spitefully shipping his hummer across to somewhere in middle england and then discovering that it literally can't turn down the majority of the streets, he gets fined 90 every day for failing emission standards and just keeping the engine ruinning costs his entire paycheck in fuel

LoveLikeJazz posted...

Bike/scooter with basket, like all of Asia.

Scooters kinda suck though.
small wheels = bad for pot holes

wet pavement = hydroplane

automatic transmission = cvt engine
^plus cvts are kinda of bitch to deal with when it comes to maintenance and if you let the gas sit the scooter for a while fucks up your scooter if you dont use it in a good while
plus scooters are expensive as hell when compared to naked motorcycles

125cc-300cc motorcycles typically have better horsepower/maintain higher top speed than most stock scooters.

plus speed is kinda a huge factor for two wheeled vehicles, as slower vehicles are likely to get rear ended by aggressive tailgaters.
a +200hp +4,0000 lbs vehicle simply is more intimidating than a scooter

DrizztLink posted...

And they aren't creating both.

That's my entire point.

I mean, they are and you mainly see it in places where they make x% of a complex be "affordable" and only available to low income.
But in general, building homes is very expensive, so yes you are going to see more market rate homes. Which is why we also need to make building homes in general cheaper so our govt money is used better to actually build more homes.

pinky0926 posted...

he gets fined 90 every day for failing emission standards

What are they gonna do, they gonna be shippin' some leaflets to me postbox? Gonna be makin a request of ninety quid back in the states? I'm just on holiday, guvnah, I don't pay imaginary fees

Gobstoppers12 posted...

I assume I can't get a McDonald's quarter pounder with cheese from a random European farmer's market, can I?

I don't live in walkable city. I live in Sunnyside, Queens. You can look it up.

McDonald's is a 10 minute walk for me right now.
Wendy's is a 5 minute walk
Starbucks 2 minutes
7 banks within 2-10 minutes
50 or so mom/pop restaurants
4 supermarkets
3-4 fruit/vegetable markets
20 or so grocery stores
3-4 99 Center Discount markets

All this for a neighborhood without ANY interventions to turn it into a 'walkable' city.

lydiaquayle posted...

I don't live in walkable city.

I don't see how that answers my question.

lydiaquayle posted...

Few thousand? That's your bar for what makes a city these days?

3000 people barely qualifies as a rural town in America.

I admit I dont know much about the concept of a walkable city, but when I said NYC as an example, I was told no because theres no affordable housing.

So what IS an example of a walkable city in the US?

its actually really nice living in a walkable area, you kind of have to experience it, it doesnt need to be a right vs left thing.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I use wagons or suitcase thingies. Also, every supermarket provides free delivery service. They send a worker out to push the entire cart of groceries that you bought to your building.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

What are they gonna do, they gonna be shippin' some leaflets to me postbox? Gonna be makin a request of ninety quid back in the states? I'm just on holiday, guvnah, I don't pay imaginary fees

You'll be nicked mate. 14 bops on the 'ead for being a right plonker.

bigblu89 posted...

So what IS an example of a walkable city in the US?

There is no example. People are trying to advocate for them.

emblem-man posted...

It's not really a fictional idea is it? Outside of the US, you do have highly dense cities with good public transportation.

It won't work everywhere in the US, at all. But in the areas where it can be done, denser cities is more cost effective, efficient, and safer. But you are specifically talking about how some market the idea, and I agree that not everyone uses the best pros/cons and narratives about it.

When people talk about 15 minute walkable cities, what they're pitching isn't your average European city. There's also the fact that cars are double or triple parked all over the place because these cities were built well before cars were common place. If I walk out of an apartment on the edge of the beltway in Rome, or if I'm in downtown Athens, I'm not suddenly magically 15 minutes away from my job, and also 15 minutes away from the grocery store, and also 15 minutes away from entertainment. A city being so old that it can't realistically support traffic is not the same as a city designed to eliminate it.

Btw @gobstoppers12 it would cost you $460 to fill up your tank.

Also 9mpg. Real talk, wtf do you do every day? Do you have to literally drive it to the gas station every time you leave the house?

Aristoph posted...

I feel like TC literally just doesn't understand the concept of a walkable city.

The grocery thing is a non-issue. When you can walk to the store in 2 minutes, you don't need buy 400 pounds of groceries to stock up for weeks in advance. Feel like a salad for dinner? Go to the store and buy salad stuff. It takes 2 minutes. That's the point. You can buy things fresh as and when you need them because it's no longer a major inconvenience to go to the store. You end up with better/fresher meals and you waste less food because you don't buy enough at once for it to go bad before it's used.

Going to work is also not an issue because, hey, it's a fucking walkable city. You can walk to work. That's the point. And the few buses the city might have for public transportation are more efficient and more reliable because there's far less traffic on the roads to cause problems. But again, the point is for it to be walkable. Ideally you don't need any transportation.

And of course your current 17 minute commute would turn into an hour of hassle. You don't live in a walkable city.

why would you want to go to the grocery store every day and not stock up for a week or two? And I lived in a walkable city. I left it as soon as I was an adult on my own. The quality of life being away from city chaos is so much better. Personally, just me. Walking to work isnt a thing. I need to take gear, paperwork boxes, firearms, uniforms transported via my car

Zers don't want to drive

lydiaquayle posted...

There is no example. People are trying to advocate for them.

Maybe thats why Im having such a hard time understanding it.

Whats an example outside the US? Just the idea that people want a city where everyones job, supermarket, entertainment options, etc are all a 15 minute walk from their house AND that house is affordable to the lower/middle class.

It just seems like a pipe dream