Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive • Hacker News Board

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#41

Post by nostromo » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:10 PM UTC

Zenst wrote: post #25

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 ac…

That's true in Seattle right now too.

The city has been building bicycle lanes all around the city -- and yet cycling is down as a percent of commuters for the fifth straight year in a row.

We could have dedicated that space to larger sidewalks and greener boulevards, instead of sparsely populated bicycle lanes. (Like London, we don't have great weather -- and we also have lots of steep hills. But city planners keep looking to cycling as our transportation panacea.)

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#42

Post by davidw » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:10 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #32

roymckenzie wrote: post #26

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

A lot of people enjoy their quiet suburban neighborhoods and don't have any particular desire to live in a dense city so to convince them these guys need to start talking about dire economic consequences.

And also to demonstrate that the urban environment is directly subsidizing the suburban neighborhoods.

If you ever get the chance to see a talk by Joe Minicozzi from Urban3, I highly recommend it.

He covers this in detail, and his work has been used in a number of Strong Towns posts, like this one:

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/1/9/the-real-reason...

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#43

Post by kuschku » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:12 PM UTC

jimmaswell wrote: post #37

crispyambulance wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That concept has already been implemented. Urban planners who practice it call it "new urbanism". It has been a mixed bag, but is better than the "malls-connected-by-highways" approach of many suburban development s.

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…

More density allows more establishments and offices to exist, and of more different kinds.

In a city with 10x the people, you can have 10x more shops, restaurants, etc, and you’ll as result also get 10x more variation.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#44

Post by emodendroket » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:12 PM UTC

matt4077 wrote: post #21

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 ca…

I work in downtown Boston, one of the fancier parts of one of the country's most expensive cities. There are tons of panhandlers, you encounter the smell of urine quite often, litter is everywhere, the city is served by filthy trains, etc. The stuff about high prices is definitely true (hell, this article touts it as a benefit!) and there are plenty of other parts of the city that are considerably more run-down. I don't see what the guy is saying that's wrong.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#45

Post by nikomen » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:12 PM UTC

itaris wrote: post #20

Gustomaximus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jobs. Then lifestyle.

I'm not sure I understand. The jobs are in the city, correct?

In a lot of Americans cities jobs are spread out in the suburbs. In my southeastern US, a bank recently located a large office presence from downtown to a suburban area right off the interstate. I understand a lot of it was to do with a lack of space. However, in the past an employee had the option of living and working downtown at this bank. With the new office location, that option is non-existent.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#46

Post by ams6110 » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:12 PM UTC

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…

It may push down retail rents but it will push up other rents, as now developers have to set aside retail space that there may be no demand for, when it could otherwise go to increased supply (lower rents) for residential or office or whatever.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#47

Post by trgn » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:13 PM UTC

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…

You can have dense towns that feel spacious and verdant as well. Downtown Savannah, Charleston, many streetcar suburbs in older cities, many small college towns, ... USA has phenomenally good examples of dense but pleasant urban environments.

NYC is an extreme. It's actually pretty awful in the ways you describe. Now image you keep the city but subtract all the cars for personal transportation. It'd feel so much more open, quiet, airy, accomodating.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#48

Post by kuschku » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:13 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #35

oftenwrong wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Density doesn't necessarily lead to those things. For example, Tokyo is very dense, but has a low level of crime, and is quite clean. Poverty is found in urban, suburban and rural areas. This same site has a good series of articles on suburban poverty: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/12/6/best-of-2016-s...

Yes, there's the one example everyone loves to trot out. Japan is different from the US in a lot of ways and we can't just wave a wand and turn New York into Tokyo (or Cleveland into Sapporo, for that matter).

You can, but that magic wand is enforcing a culture of collectivism. If, from early age on, children learn to take on responsibility for society, this is possible.

The US culture of individualism at any price, not giving a single fuck about any other human being, is a significant factor in this.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#49

Post by aqme28 » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:14 PM UTC

_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!

So like a mall, but bigger?

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#50

Post by trgn » Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 5:15 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #35

oftenwrong wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Density doesn't necessarily lead to those things. For example, Tokyo is very dense, but has a low level of crime, and is quite clean. Poverty is found in urban, suburban and rural areas. This same site has a good series of articles on suburban poverty: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/12/6/best-of-2016-s...

Yes, there's the one example everyone loves to trot out. Japan is different from the US in a lot of ways and we can't just wave a wand and turn New York into Tokyo (or Cleveland into Sapporo, for that matter).

In NYC you certainly could. It takes banning cars for personal transport and expand the subway. The city would improve tremendously. Not quite like waving a wand, but doesn't require tearing down and rebuilding either.