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

21–30 of 429 posts

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#21

Post by matt4077 »

jnordwick wrote: post #2

> Streetscape enhancements add value to an area and are associated with higher rents and the attraction of new businesses. In addition there is good evidence to show that improving walking and cycling environments raises private property values by significant amounts. Nobody doubts this. Actually everybody sees this as the problem. I love NYC, but i also hate it. There is a price for density: crime, trash, prices, ov…

> crime, trash, prices, overcrowding, urban decay, poverty and homelessness, etc.

I fail to see how that description actually fits today's New York, or most other large US cities. It may have been true in the 80s. But just the change over time proves that these aren't necessary consequences of high density.

You may also wish to take a walk around Paris, Venice, or Barcelona to see how attractive urban environments can be[0].

Yes, some people may always prefer rural life. But those currently living in Suburbia, USA have probably chosen the worst of all worlds.

[0]: Random street view link: https://goo.gl/maps/t96mDMV48rx

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#22

Post by 0x4f3759df »

reaperducer wrote: post #3

This is something that certain cities have understood for many years. Chicago, for example, mandates that all new development from a simple three-story building to a 100-story skyscraper has retail at its base to improve the walkability of its streets and make its business corridors vibrant. This also helps push down retail rents even in the CBD, allowing local upstart businesses a shot at reaching the masses. Chicag…

I did not know that about Chicago amazing.

I think its interesting how people complain loudly if they lose a stretch of beach, but don't seem to complain if a stretch of the street becomes a blight for the next 100 years (or the life of the building)

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#23

Post by davidw »

del82 wrote: post #19
reaperducer wrote: post #3

This is something that certain cities have understood for many years. Chicago, for example, mandates that all new development from a simple three-story building to a 100-story skyscraper has retail at its base to improve the walkability of its streets and make its business corridors vibrant. This also helps push down retail rents even in the CBD, allowing local upstart businesses a shot at reaching the masses. Chicag…

Interestingly, Strong Towns published an article a bit more than a week ago about why mandating ground-floor retail is also not the best way to go: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/1/8/mixed-up-priori...

He's one of the Market Urbanism ( http://marketurbanism.com/ ) guys, so a bit more on the libertarian edge of things, but it's a good point in any event: cargo cult urbanism is probably better than "suburban experiment" urbanism, but flexibility and adaptability are even better.

Edit - one of the really cool things about the growing movement that - broadly - includes YIMBY's, Market Urbanists, Strong Towns and so on is that it really crosses the ideological spectrum. For instance, this quote:

"Reforming local land use controls is one of those rare areas in which the libertarian and the progressive agree. The current system restricts the freedom of the property owner, and also makes life harder for poorer Americans. The politics of zoning reform may be hard, but our land use regulations are badly in need of rethinking."

From https://www.brookings.edu/research/reforming-land-use-regula...

Edit 2 if you're interested in Strong Towns, it's a pretty cool group, with Slack ( https://www.strongtowns.org/discussion-board/ ) and local groups that are starting to form: https://www.strongtowns.org/local/

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#24

Post by crispyambulance »

pxeboot wrote: post #12

I wonder what city will be the first to ban private cars and allow all streets to work this way.

"The first" was probably a town incorporated in the middle ages.

Many towns in Europe that have public squares and donkey sized streets ban private cars in their historic cores (or limit them to special permits).

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#25

Post by Zenst »

I love wide pavements as a pedestrian, alas London is in the grip of a cycle paths fetish and in many instances, they eat up pavements with some cases reducing pedestrian access and seen some which have reduced the pedestrian area to one foot due to the oversight of sheltered bus stops consuming the other side of the pavement. I'm not against cycle paths and indeed for them, but not when they erode away pedestrian access.

That said, been case of many roads paved over for pedestrian only access and they have been fantastic on many levels for shops.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#27

Post by wastedhours »

_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!

Seeing it at the larger end of the spectrum with Bill Gates [0], will be interesting to see whether all of the smart city tools people are developing will lead to the rise of really dense, human-centred cities..

[0] https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/14/16648290/bill-gates-smar...

Post reply on HN