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

361–370 of 370 posts

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#361

Post by FooBarBizBazz »

Retric wrote: post #294
presentation wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roads often do make a big difference - if there are too many lanes it you end up with a block-sized, loud and dangerous chasm in the middle of what could be a bustling neighborhood. I live in Tokyo and it’s dominated by streets that are literally barely wide enough to have two cars pass each other at <5mph, and I’ve come to love that.

IMO this still just comes down to density. Getting to a park just across a 3 lane divided highway isn’t a problem especially via skyway or underground tunnel. Walking 5 miles to that same park isn’t. Narrow streets can significantly boost city density which then gets people out of their cars. One way streets make crossing traffic easier. But, if there’s nowhere to walk to then it’s all kind of pointless.

I kinda disagree. Highways are usually real barriers within cities. So much so that, if a city made the mistake of running highways through itself or along its waterfront, it's now worth it to spend billions burying the thing or building some kind of giant elevated park on top.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#362

Post by bwship »

HungSu wrote: post #357
Retric wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve lived in walkable US cities. The main ingredients are mixed use, high density, effective public transportation, useable sidewalks, and zero surface level parking lots. Roads and underground parking is fine because they don’t lower density that much and density defines how much you can reach in a reasonable walk. What I think people miss is public transportation is the least important part of the equation. Once p…

Which US cities do you consider walkable?

New York, San Francisco, and Washington DC would be my top three.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#363

Post by mateo411 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #175
mateo411 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This exists. It's usually called a condo or a townhome. I'm sure they exist in Texas too. You'll find them in more urban areas. They aren't as popular during a pandemic, but they usually cost less than a house, and if the organization is functioning well enough, then you also have the outside maintenance covered.

A nice condo in Dallas currently goes for $400k with a $700/month HOA assessment.

More proof that condos exist in Texas. The HOA payment seems a little high, but everything is bigger in Texas.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#364

Post by webmaven »

bwship wrote: post #362
HungSu wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which US cities do you consider walkable?

New York, San Francisco, and Washington DC would be my top three.

Chunks of the Los Angeles metropolitan area (that are cities in their own right by any reasonable definition) -- eg. Hollywood -- are walkable.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#365

Post by xboxnolifes »

habosa wrote: post #261

Sometimes I think Americans don’t know how badly they want this. Americans will tell you how wonderful European cities are with their small streets and their public squares filled with great restaurants. They think we don’t have cities like that because we’re lacking some fundamental European-ness. No. We just put cars everywhere. Cars ruin everything. Now you have wider streets. Louder streets. More dangerous street…

The problem isn't cars. Cars are the symptom. The underlying issue is zoning that disincentivizes walkable areas and public transport infrastructure so bad that most people don't even want to use it.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#366

Post by sporkland »

bwship wrote: post #362
HungSu wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which US cities do you consider walkable?

New York, San Francisco, and Washington DC would be my top three.

I found Boston much more walkable than SF having lived in both. Due to smaller size, higher density, better transit, flatter, safer. I also find Boston seemed to be prioritizing it more, whereas sf govt really struggles to prioritize peds, muni, bikes.

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#367

Post by [deleted] »

taeric wrote: post #331
mulmen wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nothing is stopping anyone from building a new city center in the middle of Montana, such that it has plenty of buildable supply. I don’t think it is that easy. The state has to approve a new town. I don’t think you can just create one at will. Nearby landowners are certainly going to have opinions. > You seem to be pointing that existing cities should double down on their density. Ideally, yes. But really I am say…

I think it is easier than you'd think to get a builder to build a neighborhood. Convincing mixed zoning to move in is more difficult. Largely due to how confusing store ownership is. Often the buildings need to exist and be owned before businesses look to lease in places. None of which is to say I disagree with zoning being problematic. I fully agree with that points. I just think it is oversold. Folks like having ro…

[deleted]

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#368

Post by spamizbad »

vdqtp3 wrote: post #350
spamizbad wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans aren’t homogenous: those who adore European cities aren’t the same ones demanding parking minimums at their local neighborhood groups. Those people don’t give a hoot about European cities: they just want everything within a 10 mile radius of where they live to be easy to drive to and don’t want to think through or be reminded of the externalities.

I'd actually be fine with neighborhoods being made car-hostile and pedestrian friendly if I could get TO the neighborhood and park just outside it. The unmentioned aspect of making everything "walkable" (at least in the US) is it denies access to those who are not local.

The standard for "not car friendly" in the US is:

- Having to park more than 500 feet away from a business

- Traffic that moves slower than 40MPH

- Commercial district thoroughfares that only dedicate a single lane to each traffic direction

- Paid parking

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#369

Post by alanbernstein »

kasey_junk wrote: post #129
throw0101a wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You could just build walkable suburbs. Why there is a distinction between 'suburb' and 'smaller city' is beyond me, but there really is. The Not Just Bikes channel semi-recently did a video on "streetcar suburbs": * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb It's how things used to be built pre-WW2.

I grew up on the south side of Indianapolis perhaps one of the worst walkable places there is. There are major streets there still named for street car service “Stop 11/Stop 12/etc”. The wild thing is that it was direct public policy that lead to the death of extensive public transit there.

Not just public policy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp....

Re: Surveys show Americans want more walkable cities

#370

Post by brighton36 »

Gigachad wrote: post #82
brighton36 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problems of governance are non-trivial in tenant-owned apartments. Not that they can't work, obviously. But, I think the ability to 'vote with your feet', is a bit more powerful than the ability to reconcile disagreements between owners.

I think for things to work, we need to seriously cut down the fees for selling a house. The fees and laws are set up for someone who buys/sells once every few decades. So if you move frequently, there is no way you could be a owner without taking serious losses.

That's not a bad idea.
Post reply on HN