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

(+) Yeah! (+)

Traffic in Rome is absolutely mental. I can't imagine actually driving around there if you're at best an average driver.

A walkable city is a cool idea. Im not sure how America would be able to adopt it in the way some European and asian countries have, but I do like the idea.

I also dont think they would make cars as a concept obsolete like some seem to think though. The united states is HUGE. I dont think cars will ever be obsolete here.

Noname13 posted...

why would you want to go to the grocery every store and not stock up for a week or two?

Unless you are buying food for 6 or more people, whatever amount that only lasts for a week can fit in an entire shopping cart. And even if that's more than that, any large supermarket provides free delivery pushcarts where employees push your groceries to your building.

pinky0926 posted...

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

Wow. That sounds like a nightmare. Around here a 25 gallon tank would cost about $90 to fill from bottom to top.

I also don't even drive a hummer, I drive a Chevy Sonic hatchback. I was just characterizing a typical American who doesn't much care for the European way of life.

Also, its 110 out. I cant imagine waking to work

s0nicfan posted...

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.

Yeah, to be fair I'm not really arguing 15 minute cities, I'm more just arguing high density living in general, which is a more realistic path to strive for.

bigblu89 posted...

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.

Cities that are already dense.
I would imagine Singapore, or the newer cities in China, and perhaps parts of Hong Kong.

Noname13 posted...

Also, its 110 out. I cant imagine waking to work

Ideally, the walkable city would be where you can walk from building to building along walkways, tunnels, and overhead throughways where everything can be indoors.

probably just fatties not knowing how legs work

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Wow. That sounds like a nightmare. Around here a 25 gallon tank would cost about $90 to fill from bottom to top.

There's a reason why the most popular cars in the uk are ones that can do like 70mpg

I also don't even drive a hummer, I drive a Chevy Sonic hatchback. I was just characterizing a typical American who doesn't much care for the European way of life.

No thats less fun, go back to being a rolling coal hick

bigblu89 posted...

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

That's the neat part. THERE ISN'T ONE.

ssb_yunglink2 posted...

A walkable city is a cool idea. Im not sure how America would be able to adopt it in the way some European and asian countries have, but I do like the idea.

I also dont think they would make cars as a concept obsolete like some seem to think though. The united states is HUGE. I dont think cars will ever be obsolete here.

Personally I dont think if would work in the us.

then transport industry is simply too big here in the US. Too many things rely on transportation, from point a to point b stuff of that nature

Honestly it's astonishing how bad your physical health can decline from moving out of the city to the suburbs.

Sure, the air is cleaner. Maybe you eat better vegetables. I dunno how to quantify those things.

But something really immediate and fucky happens to your body when you go from averaging 20k steps a day to like...800.

Homeless_Waifu posted...

Personally I dont think if would work in the us.

then transport industry is simply too big here in the US. Too many things rely on transportation, from point a to point b stuff of that nature

Not to mention that these walkable cities are built for walking or taking public transport. Like I would consider Tokyo a walkable city. It's massive sure, but its design is so that if you wanted to, you could get to the other side of the city in 20 minutes just by taking the train, and everything is within walking distance of any train station.

When I was in Korea the best part was I could get anywhere not having to drive a car. I could walk to the train station or use a taxi and if I was getting groceries or something heavy I just used a taxi. I walked for 20-30 minutes to a place regularly and I would love to be able to rely on public transport if I needed to get far instead of having to drive for everything. Most places even if they are a mile or two away dont feel like a safe walk in the states.

Convenience. Environmentally friendly. More social.

Just a few bullet points. Also makes it easier to explore to find smaller businesses.

R_Jackal posted...

Convenience. Environmentally friendly. More social.

Just a few bullet points. Also makes it easier to explore to find smaller businesses.

Ok. let's not jump the gun there.

I've lived in cities and never spoken to my neighbours for years. People avoid eye contact on the subway. Everyone is slightly afraid of being mugged or accosted by an unwell homeless person at any time.

In rural towns you can't so much as take a piss on a lamppost without it being the talk of the town in the neighbouring village bar. I go into my small town gym and people I've never met before address me by my name, because "I know yer da".

I think cities are more alienating for a lot of people if we are being really honest.

Ivany2008 posted...

Not to mention that these walkable cities are built for walking or taking public transport. Like I would consider Tokyo a walkable city. It's massive sure, but its design is so that if you wanted to, you could get to the other side of the city in 20 minutes just by taking the train, and everything is within walking distance of any train station.

Same can be said for NYC, but on a larger scale. Your never more than a 5 minute walk from a subway stop, but it would probably take you more than 20 minutes to get from one end to the other.

So is the only thing stopping NYC from being considered a walkable city the size and lack of affordable housing?

ssb_yunglink2 posted...

A walkable city is a cool idea. Im not sure how America would be able to adopt it in the way some European and asian countries have, but I do like the idea.

I also dont think they would make cars as a concept obsolete like some seem to think though. The united states is HUGE. I dont think cars will ever be obsolete here.

I think the idea is to make cars a use case. If you only need to go to work, walk there. If you want to visit somewhere an hour away, then driving becomes the choice. I get why people gravitate to it.

Commuting to work isn't just the gas. It's the gas, the car note, the cost of insurance, and the perpetual riskiness of having to drive on the road with other stupid humans.

dummy420 posted...

When I was in Korea the best part was I could get anywhere not having to drive a car. I could walk to the train station or use a taxi and if I was getting groceries or something heavy I just used a taxi. I walked for 20-30 minutes to a place regularly and I would love to be able to rely on public transport if I needed to get far instead of having to drive for everything. Most places even if they are a mile or two away dont feel like a safe walk in the states.

But did you purposely get a place near your job, and everything else kinda fell into place?

pinky0926 posted...

Ok. let's not jump the gun there.

I've lived in cities and never spoken to my neighbours for years. People avoid eye contact on the subway. Everyone is slightly afraid of being mugged or accosted by an unwell homeless person at any time.

In rural towns you can't so much as take a piss on a lamppost without it being the talk of the town in the neighbouring village bar. I go into my small town gym and people I've never met before address me by my name, because "I know yer da".

I think cities are more alienating for a lot of people if we are being really honest.

I should clarify I guess, by more social I more meant "easier to get to places together with friends and family", but yeah.

You don't need to plan out the Uber and backup driver to get home after a night out of you all just have to walk a couple blocks, basically.

Other countries do this and it is superior.

it cant happen in the US because someone will say that it is taking away some kind of freedom.

R_Jackal posted...

I should clarify I guess, by more social I more meant "easier to get to places together with friends and family", but yeah.

You don't need to plan out the Uber and backup driver to get home after a night out of you all just have to walk a couple blocks, basically.

Ah yeah thats true. Going on a night out in the suburbs fucking sucks. There's like 3 places to go, they're all dead and shut at 11 and you just blew $40 on several taxi rides to get between them.

Being in a big city you can literally get whatever you want within 15 minutes of your apartment. Ramen at midnight? Why not.

pinky0926 posted...

Going on a night out in the suburbs fucking sucks. There's like 3 places to go, they're all dead and shut at 11 and you just blew $40 on several taxi rides to get between them.

"Let's hit the bars!"

"We have an Applebee's."

People who walk to the grocery store (like those in most major European cities) tend to only shop for 1-2 days at a time. They don't do the "go to Costco and buy 150 packs of everything" mentality of Americans

bigblu89 posted...

So is the only thing stopping NYC from being considered a walkable city the size and lack of affordable housing?

NIMBY policies is the most important thing. All changes need go through so many interests.
The entire NY City Council needs to vote on it.
State Senator and Councilperson often needs the support,
MTA is a multi-state public benefit corporation that is not controlled by the city,
Local Community Board has input,
Local residents often oppose,
Business interests,
etc.

Not gonna read this whole topic but I live in a walkable neighborhood of a city that isnt even very big and it rules

we live within a ~mile walking distance of dozens of restaurants, multiple music venues, a grocery store, our clinic, eye doctor, dentist, etc

in the summer if I didnt have to go into work we could go a whole without needing to drive anywhere

whats not to love?

Here's a stat I find fun and relevant: more people crossed the Brooklyn Bridge on a daily basis before cars than after cars.
https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2011/04/11/the-efficient-past-and-wasteful-present-of-the-brooklyn-bridge

If the job of the Brooklyn Bridge is to move people between the two boroughs, the reallocation of space from transit to cars has been disastrous. In 1902, one year before the photograph was taken, the Brooklyn Bridge moved roughly 341,000 people a day across all its modes, according to the Federal Highway Administration. It hit its peak capacity a few years later, with 426,000 people using it each day in 1907.

Today, 125,000 motor vehicles cross the Brooklyn Bridge each day [PDF], as do roughly 4,000 pedestrians and 2,600 cyclists. For the bridge to carry as many people as it did at its peak, each of those cars would need to carry more than three people, but they do not. In 1989, when the city counted around 132,000 motor vehicles crossing, the FHWA estimated that 178,000 people crossed the bridge daily.

Setting aside environmental concerns (which I don't think you should do!), cars are an inefficient means for transporting masses of people. The cities reliant on them have to give over ever more space to parking, leaving less and less for the reasons people want to go to cities: restaurants, businesses, entertainment.

pinky0926 posted...

Ah yeah thats true. Going on a night out in the suburbs fucking sucks. There's like 3 places to go, they're all dead and shut at 11 and you just blew $40 on several taxi rides to get between them.

Also, it's generally a bad idea to make the drunks rely on car travel.

Exercise
Less pollution
More enjoyable
No downsides at all

Noname13 posted...

My 17 minute drive to work would turn into an hour plus commute of walking

Walkability isn't just about sidewalks. It's also about nearby access to things. In your case, it's not walkable, as opposed to some notion you seem to have that it's walkable but you can't walk it anyway, which is absurd.

I mean walkable cities are basically the perfect compromise between modern availability of pretty much everything and human necessity for exercise. Cars are dangerous, bad for the environment, and are just more sitting when people already sit too much as it is.

Public transportation is fantastic when it is available and well maintained, but that is rare outside major cities. So not having to depend on that element can also be a bonus.

the problem is that even if a city has enough public transport, people from outside the city still need a car to get to their nearest train/bus station anyway.

Like, I'd rather take the train into Boston than drive because driving in Boston sucks and there's enough subway stations, but anyone who doesn't live within 10 miles of Boston probably still has to drive to a train station anyway.

bigblu89 posted...

But did you purposely get a place near your job, and everything else kinda fell into place?

I was stationed there so I was about a 10-15 minute walk to work. About the same time to get off base plus another 10 minutes to get to the train station or just grab a taxi when I get off base if I wanted to go there. I went around enough of the country to see if I was in a big enough city I could get around by walking or public transport.

I'm not an expert on city design and development but it doesn't take an expert to realize the current system across most of America, that of never-ending urban sprawl, is not sustainable.

I live in San Francisco mainly because its walkable. Only 7 miles wide. Everyday is an adventure. I could never go back to living in the suburbs its like a living hell for me.

lydiaquayle posted...

Are you disabled? Seems quite easy if you're only walking 10-15 minutes. 80 year old grandmothers do it every day with carts and suitcases.

Sure if youre only buying a few things, but some of us like to buy for the week.

Because it is better than saying gentrification

The idea that a lot of European cities are the way they are because they're ancient is silly because a lot of major cities also built massive road and highways in the 20th century, cities like Amsterdam and Madrid. The only difference is they realized early on that bulldozing their city centers for car centric travel was a mistake and rectified it. American cities sadly have not done that and only now are very few of them starting to come around to making their cities more walkable and accessible.

bigblu89 posted...

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?

Forgot this one. It absolutely does apply.

ViewtifulGrave posted...

Sure if youre only buying a few things, but some of us like to buy for the week.

Most people buy for the week-two weeks/month, because of the hassle involved.

But the point is that if it WASN'T a hassle to get to a store to buy something and bring it back, then it's better if you you only buy things that are fresh that are like 2-3 times a week instead.

TheGoldenEel posted...

Not gonna read this whole topic but I live in a walkable neighborhood of a city that isnt even very big and it rules

we live within a ~mile walking distance of dozens of restaurants, multiple music venues, a grocery store, our clinic, eye doctor, dentist, etc

in the summer if I didnt have to go into work we could go a whole without needing to drive anywhere

whats not to love?

This as well. You don't need a new York city in order to have denser housing and better land zoning policy that allows different types of businesses to exist where people live.

I've lived it for several years now after being on the opposite extreme before then and it's objectively better. Everyone should have access to it. A car is nice, but in this situation, you see that as nice as it is, it's largely a burden you don't need, and all the downsides quickly become apparent and irrational. Bikeable cities are also great.

I live in a very walkable area. It's fucking fantastic. I'm like a 10 minute walk from 90% of the things that I need to do. My work commute is the longest distance I need to travel, but I just watch TV on my phone during it while riding a bus. Not owning a car makes it very inexpensive to be me.

To the debate about groceries; I've seen a lot of people tout the benefits of cargo bikes for exactly that purpose. You can't fill up a trunk load necessarily but there are steps between that and carrying everything by hand.

Antifar posted...

To the debate about groceries; I've seen a lot of people tout the benefits of cargo bikes for exactly that purpose. You can't fill up a trunk load necessarily but there are steps between that and carrying everything by hand.

I wish more States/Federal govt had credits for E-bikes .

Well, subsidized E-bikes I mean, not tax credits specifically, but tax credits end up being how we choose to subsidize stuff

But if everything is within walking and streetcar distance, how will I spend $100 a month on gasoline? How will I spend 6 hours traveling to and from work every week?

Rika_Furude posted...

The idea of living somewhere where everything is within walking distance is superior to the idea of living somewhere where you need to drive everywhere

No chance in hell. I'll take driving as a cost of being farther away from people.

wanderingshade posted...

But if everything is within walking and streetcar distance, how will I spend $100 a month on gasoline? How will I spend 6 hours traveling to and from work every week?

By spending that on public transportation. And youll spend longer waiting on transportation and walking

Noname13 posted...

By spending that on public transportation. And youll spend longer waiting on transportation and walking

You really don't understand the concept, do you?

DrizztLink posted...

You really don't understand the concept, do you?

The concept dont matter. Its our reality. The concept wil never happen

driving fuckin sucks