Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive • Hacker News Board

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#331

Post by lazerpants » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:19 PM UTC

com2kid wrote: post #202

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…

Malls typically lack quality local retailers. Local artists renting out a store front to sell their works, local gyms, martial arts studios, dance studios, that small store stuffed to the brim with cute little decor items, clothing stores for local fashion designers, and of course small restaurants. Malls have none of those. Maybe a couple local jewelers, and everything else is large nation wide (or regional) chains.…

Here's a really cool story about a mall that has almost all local retailers.

https://www.texasmonthly.com/the-culture/scenes-inside-houst...

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#332

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:20 PM UTC

Johnny555 wrote: post #229

baby wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only city I've been in the US that made me think "wow, that's kind of walkable" was Boston. Are there any other dense cities I should visit?

San Francisco is quite walkable -- when I lived there, within a 5 block radius (roughly a 10 minute walk) I had 2 grocery stores, at least a half dozen corner markets, miscellaneous shops (dry cleaner, shoe repair, a cigar store, produce market, etc), numerous bars and restaurants. The entire city is only 7 miles wide, so about half the city is within a 30 minute walking radius.

[deleted]

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#333

Post by IWeldMelons » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:23 PM UTC

tpm wrote: post #322

IWeldMelons wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best urban environments I've lived in so far are the ones in the ex-USSR. They had moderate amount of street retail, not too much, but were very walkable. Today, in the area around me they began retrofitting the lowest levels of the condo buildings with cafeterias and such and it is becoming too busy, too messy and uncomfortable the people who lives in these buildings. Generally, what you need is not a retail in…

I'd rather say if you want that, visit new (post car-fetish era) developments in central and western Europe, like in many German towns. Essentially any German town I've been to is better than most of the Eastern Europe I know. While Eastern block estates were built mostly without cars in mind, they were also rushed, low quality buildings, without enough retail or comunal spaces, built in space won by razing old build…

Never been to Western Europe, but although Eastern European building probably look dull, but they are not low quality, at least not compared to what they built in the US; you need also to keep in mind that the Eastern Block was poorer. I do not think there is not enough communal spaces in general, but there are problematic areas, true, but in observation, all the problems in urban development started appearing mostly after the fall of the USSR. Today they are building up with little regard for proper urban planning.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#334

Post by thriftwy » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:25 PM UTC

IWeldMelons wrote: post #321

thriftwy wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of apartments that late USSR built would rank as "projects" in the USA. Yes there's less crime because their mixed occupants usually have work and life, but they're far from comfortable. Most of NYC's homes are suburbia or town houses I guess (over tunnel and bridge) which for all of their shortcomings provide much better quality of life.

First of all, the projects often do not look bad, and if you fill them with more or less decent public are nice buildings. Now, speaking of "better quality of life" -- no they do not. I lived in condos in NYC (brooklyn), and they all universally were bad - built in 1920s, made literally from paper, stinky, could hear my neighbors, required constant maintenance, had no public areas to speak of. Soviet condo buildings…

I guess you were lucky. 1965 was a top year for USSR after all. I used to live in the flat like that in Moscow, everything you listed was there, but it was kinda frustrating there was nowhere to buy fresh bread or eat out in the walking distance. I may sound grumpy at that, I guess. You could walk 25 minutes for a mall with multiplex.

Now I'm living in apartment in historic Saint Petersburg borough, and that makes for a huge difference. I have maybe 20 bars & restaurants in the walking distance! A few farmers' shops too. I can walk to three different cinemas and a theatre! I live next door to an university!

So I think that european-style urban cores should continue to be The Thing.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#335

Post by vinceguidry » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:25 PM UTC

_qbxp wrote: post #118

vinceguidry wrote: post #87

I pay a pretty hefty premium to live in the only walkable neighborhood in Atlanta, Midtown, and even then I'd only call it "barely walkable." There's still not nearly enough density for me to spend a whole lot of time walking around. Still, you can't put a price on having a grocery store, train station, liquor store, neighborhood bar, and cheap Mediterranean restaurant all within a 5 minute walk. As much as I'm payin…

I've started my search to buy a place in Midtown, precisely because of the walkability. The prices really do reflect it..

Yeah, and if you're not right inside the Juniper - Spring St Corridor, you may as well live in West Midtown. Brutal.

Kicking myself for not trying harder to buy into the Metropolis back when 1-beds still went for <$250k

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#336

Post by Johnny555 » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:34 PM UTC

goda90 wrote: post #301

Johnny555 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a lot more faith in technology than I do -- there will still be accidents, as good as self-driving cars are, they are still subject to the laws of physics and sometimes cars will run into each other or other objects or people. We already have effectively self-driving cars with Uber and other car-sharing services, and all you need to do is go to SFO's departure level during peak travel times to see the traffi…

The key really is self driving only. No human drivers. Communication between cars and road systems. At that point, collision avoidance becomes only about pedestrians, animals, and other random objects that enter the street unexpectedly. The self driving car will be able to see, predict, and respond to that, and communicate the need to stop to the cars behind far faster than a human driver. With inter-car communicatio…

random objects that enter the street unexpectedly. The self driving car will be able to see, predict

How does a self-driving car predict the unexpected? Braking distance of a 30mph car is 45 ft (ignoring reaction time) so anything that happens less than 45 feet in front of a self-driving car is going to need evasive action. On a busy street with cars in all lanes, the self-driving car is going to need to decide whether to hit the object (which could be a person darting across the street), or swerve into the car next to it.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#337

Post by philipodonnell » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:36 PM UTC

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...

#2 and #3 seem reasonable, but are largely out of the local government's control and both are chicken-egg situations. If it was the most profitable use of the space to do mixed retail then developers would, but its not, so they don't. But the city wants mixed use retail because its better for the citizens, and they have the legal authority to force developers to make slightly less money in exchange to improve the city for its citizens, just as they do with any other taxes, so I don't see why they shouldn't. #2 and #3 (and probably #1) should then follow?

#1 is a cop-out. We can't require mixed use retail because none of our developers (who are experts at residential leasing) will admit to having the expertise to do mixed use retail leasing. Its not that different nor is it rocket science.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#338

Post by chc » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:40 PM UTC

baby wrote: post #268

com2kid wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of DT areas of cities are walkable, but Boston is kind of unique in that it has miles and miles of walkable streets. Its urban core is just really big. Portions of Seattle are very walkable (From the International District going north, quite a few miles), and individual parts of Chicago are walkable. Heck there are 2 or 3 mile stretches of San Diego are walkable (there might be more than that, I only spent a wee…

I wouldn't call Chicago and San Diego walkable (I'm talking about like european cities walkable)

I don't know about European cities, but it's generally easier to walk around the San Diego Gaslamp Quarter than it is to drive.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#339

Post by estebank » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:42 PM UTC

jdavis703 wrote: post #68

pqh wrote: post #61

I'd live in a big city if more cities and building architects cared about green spaces and noise. I'm glad people are doing research here.

The problem is the cities citizens. Northern European cities such as Copenhagen are pretty quiet, despite their high density.

Having lived in several cities in South America, Europe and now in San Francisco, wooden buildings are great for sustaining the dynamic load of an earthquake without falling down, but are terrible at noise insulation. It feels sometimes that half the housing stock has papier-mâché walls. I never truly understood the american desire for single family houses surrounded by park until I experienced the result of local building practices.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#340

Post by tpm » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 10:43 PM UTC

IWeldMelons wrote: post #333

tpm wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather say if you want that, visit new (post car-fetish era) developments in central and western Europe, like in many German towns. Essentially any German town I've been to is better than most of the Eastern Europe I know. While Eastern block estates were built mostly without cars in mind, they were also rushed, low quality buildings, without enough retail or comunal spaces, built in space won by razing old build…

Never been to Western Europe, but although Eastern European building probably look dull, but they are not low quality, at least not compared to what they built in the US; you need also to keep in mind that the Eastern Block was poorer. I do not think there is not enough communal spaces in general, but there are problematic areas, true, but in observation, all the problems in urban development started appearing mostly…

I have lived in a few 'plattenbau' and other Eastern European buildings through the years. Some of them, mostly from the 50's, are high quality by any standards. Anything newer is lacking at least in some respect (sound isolation being a very acute problem mostly, but also other issues). In the more affluent EE countries, owners invest into upgrades, but some things cannot be improved easily or at all. I have also lived in London and building quality of older/cheaper housing stock there was shockingly low compared to EE estates. Germany is much better.