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

Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 576 posts

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#351

Post by ryanklee »

robbyking wrote: post #216
steve-benjamins wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What city is this?

Strawman City

I've lived in: - Chicago - Baltimore - St Paul, MN - Minneapolis, MN - Cincinnati, OH

They all feel exactly the same with regard to the complaints in the post you are replying to.

When I was younger, cities were excellent and I would never have imagined wanting to live outside an urban center.

Now I am older and have kids and have massively different priorities than I used to; I wouldn't live in any city in any country anywhere. If it's not a suburb, count me out. I value my space, my yard, and my control over my ambient environment. I value my multiple cars that can get me to where I want to go when I want to get there. It's nice and quiet and people are fewer and more predictable. Yes, there are tradeoffs -- the culture sucks, but I can leave my house and go elsewhere for culture. I don't need it right outside my house. It makes my life harder to manage.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#352

Post by FFRefresh »

__derek__ wrote: post #285
mancerayder wrote: post #84

High density is for young people. I've lived in ultra high density for decades and it's starting to really hurt. I sleep poorly due to noise (mostly from neighbors) and it's not fun to go for a walk anymore. I'm looking for a rural place to purchase a home because sorry, I just don't want to tolerate people's selfishness anymore. Density should come with more rules, both laws that are enforced as well as cultural rul…

> I'm looking for a rural place to purchase a home because sorry, I just don't want to tolerate people's selfishness anymore. Density should come with more rules, both laws that are enforced as well as cultural rules, and in American cities it seems chaos and lawlessness are embraced as tolerance and compassion. Have you lived in a rural area? If not, you should find a way to try it out before taking the leap. City f…

I grew up in a rural area, and I experienced zero instances of loud ATVs and shotguns where I lived, at any time of day. This view sounds like a TV trope, which one might lean on if they don't have much in-person experience of living in a rural area themselves.

The advice to try it before you buy it is sound though.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#353

Post by bobthepanda »

robrenaud wrote: post #305
dont__panic wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any success filtering for walkability in the US when buying a home? As far as I can tell, "walkability" scores are borderline useless -- the small town I currently live in has extremely low "walkability," despite being able to walk or bike to everything I need, whereas the large city I just left has extremely high "walkability" -- despite the fact that walking around town was not pleasant due to high volumes of car t…

Manhattan has a lot of car traffic. Short of the urban core of Philly, DC, Chicago, SF, or my favorite parts of Brooklyn (which also have a lot of car traffic), nothing seems nearly as walkable in the US. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see congestion pricing and fewer cars on the streets in Manhattan. The best walkable suburbs I've visited, Montclair and Red Bank in NJ and Ardmore, PA seem pretty sad, small, and bor…

Sometimes, people are looking for small and boring, like some parents who are raising kids and are no longer partying every weekend. (There are also pros and cons to raising children in cities; growing up in NYC I got a free transit pass in middle school and was able to take myself to places like the Met and the Guggenheim pretty effortlessly, and you certainly can't get amenities like those everywhere.)

There's nothing wrong with small and boring, the major issue is that generally the overwhelming majority of US housing stock and zoning laws are geared towards picket-fence suburbia, to the detriment of people who don't necessarily want that. Plenty of people certainly want that, but it's probably not anywhere near like 90% of people in the US.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#354

Post by vangelis »

tmh88j wrote: post #136
oldnetguy wrote: post #62

I lived in New York City my entire life and I am now wanting a house. I am tired of living in an apartment building. This idea that people live together communally within buildings or neighborhoods is very overrated. I have lived in multiple apartments and never has there been a real community there. The building has one holiday party and out of 144 apartments maybe 15 people show up. The posts on the chat board that…

> I lived in New York City my entire life and I am now wanting a house. I am tired of living in an apartment building. This idea that people live together communally within buildings or neighborhoods is very overrated. I feel the same way. I grew up in an urban environment, moved to rural areas, now back in an urban environment. I can't wait to get out of here. Too many people, too much noise and too much energy spen…

Pitbulls should be designated the fifth pest. It would go a long way towards making cities safer to walk and bike.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#356

Post by vangelis »

iratewizard wrote: post #250
badpun wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Selfishly, I really want the USA to bring city centers back to livable levels by banning most cars and redesigning them for humans. Otherwise I'm absolutely going to end up moving to Europe eventually -- likely the Netherlands There isn't a single US city which meets your criteria?

Cities in the US with strong public transit have only ended up building moving toilets for the homeless. There are a number of bigger issues that come first before billions more in public funding goes into larger wheeled toilets.

I really want to like public transit!

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#357

Post by [deleted] »

dont__panic wrote: post #313
scruple wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife and I are seriously considering our options in smaller towns in New England. Many of them predate the automobile and have the sorts of qualities that are being talked about in this thread.

I highly recommend. Hanover/Lebanon, Burlington, and Montpelier are decent places to start if you want access to arts, music, theatre, etc. If you're willing to compromise on some of those things in favor of outdoor activities, there are a LOT of great small towns in Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine that let you walk and bike to the basics. If you enjoy biking to establishments, it's worth it to actively think about…

[deleted]

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#358

Post by bobthepanda »

frumper wrote: post #334
falcolas wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of the hardest parts about buying a home, apart from all the stuff that isnt fun about buying a home, is finding somewhere that is walkable to... anything. That's because if you want an individual home, you're giving up the customer density required to make those amenities viable. In a world with the internet, at-home delivery, and yes, cars, it's simply not economically viable to create a grocery store that on…

The grocery store doesn't need to be near everyone's home. It just needs to be near your home. Buy a home in a location that suits your needs.

The problem is that the overwhelming majority of land in the US is zoned in such a way where this is not legal, and as a result the relatively few locations that do accommodate this lifestyle have high premiums (both on a per unit and per sq ft basis)

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#359

Post by rascul »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #156
AlwaysRock wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the hardest parts about buying a home, apart from all the stuff that isnt fun about buying a home, is finding somewhere that is walkable to... anything. I've rented my whole life and spent my entire adult life in cities. The idea of having to get in the car to get milk or something from the corner store, or have to drive to ANY restaurant, or not have some type of walking/running path within a few blocks of my…

Town around 50000 is a good bet then. If you can work remotely, find a college town and live outside the center, about a mile. You can bike to anything, take the bus, or just walk. I did this. I have 100 restaurants, too many bars to count, music and theatre (three!) and festivals and arts within trivial distances. No car needed.

> Town around 50000 is a good bet then.

Maybe. Two examples I've lived in or around are Chambersburg, Pennsylvania and Hattiesburg, Mississippi, with populations around 50k. Chambersburg is probably little bit more walkable because it's a little more dense, but neither are (in my opinion) comfortable for walking or biking outside of specific areas, and those specific areas don't have everything you need.

Re: Too many Americans live in places built for cars – not for human connection

#360

Post by ericmay »

Invictus0 wrote: post #350
jandrewrogers wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

30% is 100 million Americans. Also, a passport was not required to travel in North America (not sure if that is still the case). I traveled throughout Mexico and Canada before ever having a passport, for example.

Consider that America has around 45 million immigrants, most of whom probably haven't seen much of the world either. Assuming all those immigrants have no native-born children (an obviously terrible assumption), then we have 50 million passports for 250 million native-born Americans, a 20% rate. Compare that to germany's 90% rate.

Sure... but compare the size and location of Germany with that of the United States. It's probably not all that sensible to compare rates here between countries, except perhaps European countries against one another.
Post reply on HN