3 ms·
This seems to imply that most people in the US don't already have many neighbors within walking distance. I don't think that's the case at all, even in the spra
by chc 9y ago
This seems to imply that most people in the US don't already have many neighbors within walking distance. I don't think that's the case at all, even in the sprawliest of suburbs. For most people, if you don't stop by your neighbor's house for a drink or a chat, or you don't have anyone nearby you can give your house keys to, it's because of lack of interest on one or both of your parts — not because you can't conveniently reach their door. Changing street layouts won't fix a problem that doesn't stem from street layouts.
- trgn 9y agoNo, but car-suburbs don't give you the convenience of having transportation options for all ages. It also doesn't give you the convenience of having services and amenities in walking distance. Living close-by does strengthen informal ties, because you're more likely to run into eachother, literally. The alienation of the car-dependent suburb is admittedly a literary trope, but it is rooted in reality. Different people, different strokes, suburbs have a different appeal. But it's a sliding scale. People that don't enjoy car-dependency have very little inexpensive options in this country. The market has spoken, and the demand for town-living is far greater than the supply. It's reflected in the house prices, virtually any metro, the walkable areas are more expensive than the car sprawl.