Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

governing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 370 posts

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#131

Post by 8note »

cbdumas wrote: post #28
version_five wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's hardest to find, and what I prefer, is somewhere it's easy to walk and drive. I've lived in walkable places where if you do have to drive, traffic is a nightmare. And then of course there are places where you can drive without traffic but there is nowhere to walk to. I think I prefer the latter with my lifestyle, though it becomes more frustrating for meeting friends, going our for dinner + drinks, etc. For sp…

I think it's hard to find because those two preferences are in direct, irresolvable conflict.

It sounds like the Netherlands has it figure out?

Split out streets and roads. Roads are for driving fast, and streets are for destinations, slow driving, and walking.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#132

Post by refurb »

graeme wrote: post #69
cletus wrote: post #17

No, they don’t. This is a classic example of listening to what people say vs observing what they do. And it’s a good lesson in product development. Ask your users “do you want X?” And the answer is inevitably “yes”. Ask them “do you want A or B?” And you’ll start to get a better approximation of user behavior. Better yet is observing actual behavior. In this case Americans have chosen the suburbs in droves. Americans…

Your thesis is flawed. It is illegal to build new dense walkable neighborhoods in almost all of north america. But existing neighbourhoods of that style tend to be both highly priced to live in and also popular tourist destinations, implying high desirability. The older east coat cities built walkable neighbourhoods before they became illegal.

Housing is actually more expensive outside of San Francisco, at least suburbs close to the city.

I’d say there is more demand for a house with a yard in the suburbs than a 2 bedroom apartment in the city.

Especially in a post-Covid world where people are working from home, who wants to be stuck in an apartment during the next lockdown?

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#133

Post by cletus »

graeme wrote: post #69
cletus wrote: post #17

No, they don’t. This is a classic example of listening to what people say vs observing what they do. And it’s a good lesson in product development. Ask your users “do you want X?” And the answer is inevitably “yes”. Ask them “do you want A or B?” And you’ll start to get a better approximation of user behavior. Better yet is observing actual behavior. In this case Americans have chosen the suburbs in droves. Americans…

Your thesis is flawed. It is illegal to build new dense walkable neighborhoods in almost all of north america. But existing neighbourhoods of that style tend to be both highly priced to live in and also popular tourist destinations, implying high desirability. The older east coat cities built walkable neighbourhoods before they became illegal.

> It is illegal to build new dense walkable neighborhoods in almost all of north america

Yes.. because of the people's representatives. Why is that do you think?

> The older east coat cities built walkable neighbourhoods before they became illegal.

Technically, they were built before the modern automobile era when there was really no alternative. Additionally, geography played a part. Manhattan is land-constrained. So is San Francisco. LA, Chicago and Atlanta are not.

By any quantitative measure, Americans have clearly chosen a car-dependent lifestyle. Since WW2, houses have gotten larger while families have gotten smaller. When given the choice between less space is a downtown neighbourhood or more space in the suburbs the vast majority of people choose the latter.

People will even choose more space and pay exorbitant private school fees rather than live with less space but get a "free" excellent public school system, even though the latter is almost always more economically sensible, even more so the more children a family has.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#134

Post by 8note »

taeric wrote: post #105
epistasis wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't quite understand the contradiction. If you're talking about small rural areas, sure, but that's a tiny fraction of our population. And rural areas don't typically vigorously block apartment and walkable development. And I haven't seen every rural town, but all of the ones that I know of have plenty of housing near a walkable core too. I know lots of rural people that have no trouble getting in 20,000 steps da…

But... talking about the rural areas is enough to destroy the "if you build walkable areas, folks will live there." Right?

People wanted to live in rural areas before the car existed, I'm pretty sure.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#135

Post by gullywhumper »

To make cities more walkable, changing driver behavior needs to be a significant focus.

Minneapolis consistently ranks as one of the better cities for pedestrians, but even here the drivers here are really aggressive towards pedestrians to the point that some don't even care if you're pushing a stroller. Bike lanes, trails, and enhanced crosswalks are great, but they can't protect you from drivers that ignore traffic laws and drive dangerously.

The city knows it has a problem. This picture taken today is of a sign posted on one of the main bridges into downtown:

https://imgur.com/gallery/NsLGfk4

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#136

Post by graeme »

cletus wrote: post #133
graeme wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your thesis is flawed. It is illegal to build new dense walkable neighborhoods in almost all of north america. But existing neighbourhoods of that style tend to be both highly priced to live in and also popular tourist destinations, implying high desirability. The older east coat cities built walkable neighbourhoods before they became illegal.

> It is illegal to build new dense walkable neighborhoods in almost all of north america Yes.. because of the people's representatives. Why is that do you think? > The older east coat cities built walkable neighbourhoods before they became illegal. Technically, they were built before the modern automobile era when there was really no alternative. Additionally, geography played a part. Manhattan is land-constrained. S…

Nobody campaigns on parking minimums, setbacks, etc and most people you speak to haven’t heard of these things. Municipal election turnout is low.

I’ll admit it’s certainly possible. Or possible that decades ago people voted for this and the laws stayed.

But the argument seems pretty indirect given how few people are familiar with these issues.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#137

Post by megablast »

jackson1442 wrote: post #5

I like my car and I like driving. That said, I don't like driving _everywhere_. When I moved to university, it was incredibly freeing to just be able to walk somewhere I wanted to go rather than getting in my car and driving miles to get anywhere. I grew up in a suburb in Texas so walking anywhere except _maybe_ a friend's house was entirely out of the question. I visited Portland recently and it was lovely to be abl…

You like pollution? You like polluting waterways with micro plastics from your tires? You don't care about the 40k killed every year in the USA? You don't care about the destruction of countryside with roads???

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#138

Post by kumarsw »

nomel wrote: post #103
notJim wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something I only recently learned is that zoning rules generally require housing developments to include a certain amount of parking. This drives up the cost of housing, because of the space required (either up or out.) Many cities are reducing or eliminating these requirements in an effort to make housing more affordable. However, it does mean that parking will become harder, as there will be more competition for st…

> However, it does mean that parking will become harder In the city I'm near, using public parking lots means a 20 minute walk to your destination, with a $10 fee from all the time walking (or uber), with private parking costing around $15, and no meters in sight. This creates an isolated area that people never go to for a bite to eat, coffee, window shopping, or anything really, since it's a > $10 fee just to step o…

The solution to this is plentiful, well-placed municipal parking garages priced cheaper than street parking. Santa Monica does this where they have about 6-7 city-run garages spaced throughout the city with easily visible electronic signage indicating the amount of available spaces. Street parking is much more spare and priced higher. It's an enlightened alternative to tearing down buildings for more single-level lots. See Google Maps satellite view of Spokane, WA for how not to handle city parking - about half of downtown is gray asphalt.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#139

Post by mrgordon »

nomel wrote: post #123
notJim wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds strange, it sounds like an area that should’ve been served by foot and public transit traffic.

Yes, there is public transportation, but this is $6 and 20 minutes to the closest light rail stop. I never tried a bus. My point is that this area is almost only served by foot traffic, but getting your feet on the sidewalk has a pretty significant cost. I don't think this is odd though, since it's been the experience I've had getting to any downtown area. Visiting downtown San Fransisco costs around $10 to actually…

Lyft Line and Uber Pool were usually $4-5 around San Francisco before COVID and you can use electric bikes through the bike share for $15 for the entire month. Obviously it’s easier if you live near the walkable area, but it doesn’t need to be as expensive as you claim and SF is one of the more expensive cities.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#140

Post by wpm »

mulmen wrote: post #76
taeric wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This can be misleading. The supply in walkable areas will, by near definition, be lower than places you have to drive to. Such that the evidence isn't that houses are more expensive in walkable areas. The evidence is that it is not economically viable to build more walkable neighborhoods. Edit: I meant to say it could be an alternative, not that it is.

I have lived in highly walkable neighborhoods. They utilize highrises to increase density (supply) of housing and commercial space. Walkable areas are by necessity higher density, meaning they pack more supply into the same footprint.

My census tract in Chicago is denser than 96% of America. There are like two high-rises, one for seniors and some shorter new construction near the transit stops in the 5-6 story range.

The bulk of my neighborhoods density is created by missing middle housing, two and three flats, four-six square apartments, and a healthy smattering of SFHs on narrow lots.

I have a backyard. My neighbor grows a garden in between her house and her two car garage. She pollinates her garden with the honey bees she keeps.

The dichotomy between “car centric suburbia” or “huge 100 story high rises” is false. You can get to walkable density without going over three stories on average.

Post reply on HN