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

Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

strongtowns.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 429 posts

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#131

Post by abainbridge »

Animats wrote: post #105

The US has too much retail space. About 2x too much. There's a fan club for cutesy little hipster stores that sell overpriced hipster stuff bought by hipster people with their hipster little dogs. Look at the pictures in the article.[1] See any stores selling necessities? A hardware store? A real grocery store? Nah. Retail is happening at the strip mall or online. It's hard to fill those little shops at the base of c…

I agree mainly. However, it really does improve everyone's quality of life if you buy your coffee from someone who is running their own little business and wants you to come back. It makes England (in my case) seem a bit more like France, which always seems to have had a society better balanced in favour of the normal citizen, rather than The Man. If it isn't an economically sustainable, then we should strive to change the rules so that it is.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#132

Post by yazan94 »

_m8fo wrote: post #11
itaris wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, what would incentivize people to live there, as opposed to the city?

I'm still figuring that one out, hah. I think if the culture was strong enough and public transportation was "perfected" within the cofines of the 100acres people might gravitate their under normal market pressure. Otherwise I guess you could just make it cheap. For those reading -- what would incentivize you?

As a millennial, incentives for me would be a well paying job market for my career, diversity of food options, accessible outdoor activities, and an efficient metro system. Though one could get all that by living somewhere cheaper in the suburbs but sacrificing time to commute to work in this dense metropolis. Also, I do appreciate having a reasonable front/back yard. Maybe its an outdated feeling, but owning land that you can do almost anything with is empowering.

I personally would not mind living in this hypothetical place while I am young, but I would definitely not want to stay there in the mid-long term.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#133

Post by stale2002 »

ars wrote: post #57
_m8fo wrote: post #5

I've often wondered why somone moderately wealthy doesn't just start a super dense town, e.g. everything within 100 acres, and be within 10 miles of a major city. Create tons of these at a 50K people/sqmi density and implement some sort of hub spoke transportation with the major city being the hub and it could work!

> a super dense town Sounds like a nightmare. Ugh, just thinking about it makes me shudder. Why would someone wealthy want to live that way?

Wealthy people do that all the time. It is called "Living in downtown New York".

The high prices of living in the city prove that people actually prefer to live in high density places.

Why else would they be willing to pay so much money to live there if they didn't like it?

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#134

Post by xvedejas »

d--b wrote: post #126

It's always a tradeoff... - super dense cities like Tokyo or New York can feel suffocating. A lot of people can't bear it. The lack of green space, and the overcrowding of people and cars increases the stress levels by a lot. Yet, being able to walk around the city is excellent for exercising and mindfulness, it's easier to meet with people, etc. - super sparse cities (like LA or Brasilia) on the other end tend to is…

Even from the perspective of personal preference, I think it's fair to say that, at least in the US, there is a wide variety of sparse cities for people to choose from, and only a few actually dense cities. This leaves those preferring density at a relative disadvantage.

Unrelated: it's unclear to me how self-driving cars can help pollution. They're a solution to the problem of the high cost of labor, and not much else. If anything, self-driving cars will make it cheaper for everyone to ride cars everywhere, and so people will more often ride cars everywhere, and more pollution will be the result.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#135

Post by cortesoft »

d--b wrote: post #126

It's always a tradeoff... - super dense cities like Tokyo or New York can feel suffocating. A lot of people can't bear it. The lack of green space, and the overcrowding of people and cars increases the stress levels by a lot. Yet, being able to walk around the city is excellent for exercising and mindfulness, it's easier to meet with people, etc. - super sparse cities (like LA or Brasilia) on the other end tend to is…

I don't think it is some decision or planning that leads to this. New York is so dense because it is geographically constrained, and as the city grew it had no where to expand out to, so it had to become more dense to grow. Los Angeles, on the other hand, was created as smaller cities grew outward and connected to each other.

They are both successful in growth for different reasons, but their density was determined by geography, not by 'what people enjoy'.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#136

Post by jimmaswell »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #99
jimmaswell wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too much density decreases the quality of life. Overcrowdedness, very long waiting times at every establishment or government office, increased ease of pickpockets etc. to "disappear into the crowd", higher prices. You already see all this in many existing cities; you want that, but worse? I'll take malls connected by highways over that any day. Malls are nice and cars are a better experience than transit/walking in…

If density is so awful, why have malls been closing left and right for years? Why have so many people been flocking to more dense neighborhoods?

I'd guess because of the economy. The high paying/skilled jobs are there so people were forced to move. Outside of this strange vocal minority that shows up here, very few people would actually prefer to live in an urban area instead of a small town or suburb or whatever given the choice.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#137

Post by emodendroket »

davidw wrote: post #130
emodendroket wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. So people would live inside some sort of "sub-urban" environment, which wasn't quite rural, but not exactly urban either.

Some people would, sure. You'd expect that in a free market, right? Part of the point of all this is that the market we have now is very, very far from free: vast areas of our cities are zoned exclusively for single family homes. https://bendyimby.com/2016/10/04/what-to-build-where/

Who says the market is the best way to zone areas? How would you feel if you owned a house and someone opened a pig farm next door?

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#138

Post by rsynnott »

Animats wrote: post #105

The US has too much retail space. About 2x too much. There's a fan club for cutesy little hipster stores that sell overpriced hipster stuff bought by hipster people with their hipster little dogs. Look at the pictures in the article.[1] See any stores selling necessities? A hardware store? A real grocery store? Nah. Retail is happening at the strip mall or online. It's hard to fill those little shops at the base of c…

I don't know about US cities, but in Dublin, a lot of supermarkets would be the ground floor of offices or apartments in built-up areas. Very big supermarkets would be dedicated buildings (or in a shopping centre), but you can get a fair bit on the ground floor of an apartment block.

Obviously, a lot of people who live in cities don't have cars (and in many cases, even if they do have cars, won't want to use them regularly, due to the traffic), so having many smallish supermarkets works better than a few big remote ones. I don't drive, but my 25 minute walk home from work brings me past one medium-sized supermarket and two small ones. If I want a big supermarket I take a tram.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#139

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #95
roymckenzie wrote: post #26

Lol America. Where walkable streets are justified by economics and not humanities.

Economics is to urban planning like structural mechanics is to architecture. It's a way of describing a justification ("we need a beam to hold up the floor, and the math shows why") not a justification in and of itself. It's also a way of bridging differences in subjective preferences "whether we have a post or a cantilever, we need to hold up this awning, and the math shows why"). Most Americans don't live in cities…

When you say "don't live in cities", you mean "live outside of city centers", right? Because the overwhelming majority of Americans live in major metro areas.
Post reply on HN