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

81–90 of 429 posts

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#81

Post by supplied_demand »

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…

>Malls are nice and cars are a better experience than transit/walking in every facet

This isn't even remotely true. You are forgetting the time spent finding a parking spot, the opportunity cost of having a parking lot instead of more housing or commercial space, transit/walking also provides exercise, which matters in an epidemically obese society. This doesn't even get into the pollution aspect of driving or the costs of car ownership/maintenance. Cars become a depreciating asset as soon as you buy them, should we be encouraging that type of investment?

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#82

Post by AnimalMuppet »

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…

> But those currently living in Suburbia, USA have probably chosen the worst of all worlds.

Not even close. There are parts of the inner city that make the suburbs look like heaven. There are rural areas where the lack of opportunity makes the suburbs look like the promised land.

Urban environments can be fine. But they can also be (at least in places) horrible. And even when their fine, they're not for everybody. Some people just don't do well with crowds.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#83

Post by weisser »

I live in Boulder and attribute much of the quality of life here to walkable (and bikeable) streets. We have hundreds of miles of multi-use paths that are used extensively for getting around and for recreation. Our main road downtown has a pedestrian mall for a number of blocks that keeps traffic away and lends itself to street performers, community events, and a generally calming atmosphere.

Downtown parking lots are free on the weekends and just $1.25 / hour during the week — this keeps people from circling around looking for the absolute closest spot to where they are trying to go.

You can bike (or technically walk though it's >25 miles) from Boulder to Denver on a dedicated path nearly the entire time.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#84

Post by bduerst »

emodendroket wrote: post #39
jimmywanger wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a price for density: crime, trash, prices, overcrowding, urban decay, poverty and homelessness, etc. Density without strict oversight, perhaps. Hong Kong, Macau, and Singapore seem to be counterexamples.

Wow, so all we have to do is accept totalitarian rule? Where do I sign?

Can you help me understand how Singapore is totalitarian?

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#85

Post by stcredzero »

geebee wrote: post #75

Another important factor not mentioned here is the practice of "curb cuts" http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2008-06-01... I recommend the article (not just posting for a cite, it's an interesting one). But to summarize - SF has a lot of "curb cuts", sections of the curb that are cut out and lowered so a car can drive across the sidewalk to a driveway or garage. This prevents the sidewalks from becomi…

Ironically, these curb cuts break the street into small sections of curb that are too small for a legal parking spot, so there isn't really even much of a net gain in overall parking. The estimate I read was that each curb cut removes 2/3 of a street parking space.

The curb cuts create situations, where a legendary SF restaurant in a residential neighborhood becomes an "adventure" to drive to, because residential parking is so scarce. So a lot of its business comes from Tour Busses bringing in people from out of town to eat there.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#86

Post by lakechfoma »

bhewes wrote: post #69
_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!

The Woodlands, TX is the closest thing in the US. 2,500 people/sqmi 100k town outside of Houston. Started in 1974. At least as far as large scale current corporate city developments.

I was there recently, I don't think it hits the mark. Way too corporate, too expensive, something about it is fake or trying too hard or something. It's also just a few islands of walkable spots interspersed with 4 lane divided roads. I felt like it was Exxon trying to impress business travelers, not something we can really replicate everywhere.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#87

Post by vinceguidry »

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 paying, it's worth it.

Now if only I could convince my favorite coffee shop proprietor to open up a shop nearby...

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#88

Post by davidw »

weisser wrote: post #83

I live in Boulder and attribute much of the quality of life here to walkable (and bikeable) streets. We have hundreds of miles of multi-use paths that are used extensively for getting around and for recreation. Our main road downtown has a pedestrian mall for a number of blocks that keeps traffic away and lends itself to street performers, community events, and a generally calming atmosphere. Downtown parking lots ar…

Boulder's a great place in many ways, but it's also what got me really interested in urbanism, and getting involved at a local level, because it is an abject failure in terms of being affordable to even middle-class people who didn't buy in 30 years ago, with average house prices somewhere around 700K or north of that.

This is, in part, because they refuse to add denser areas like the downtown in more parts of the city, despite there being ample room to build 'in and up'.

I mean... if Aspen or something like that is expensive, it is what it is, but a larger town with ample space like Boulder or Bend (where I ended up) or Palo Alto should not have these crazy prices.

Re: Walkable Streets Are More Economically Productive

#90

Post by jimmywanger »

bduerst wrote: post #84
emodendroket wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, so all we have to do is accept totalitarian rule? Where do I sign?

Can you help me understand how Singapore is totalitarian?

Lee Kuan Yew is known to have strict authoritarian and disciplinarian policies. He basically forged Singapore from a couple square miles of swampy marshland with no natural water or resources into what is is today.

It's no longer that way, but it's been molded that way that it's a Brave New World sort of life. It's quite strange over there. Very clean and safe, but there are tons of extremely strict laws.

Post reply on HN