8 ms·

As a european a non-walkable city seems like an oxymoron to me (although I have travelled extensively in the US so I do know what this is referring to). A frie

As a european a non-walkable city seems like an oxymoron to me (although I have travelled extensively in the US so I do know what this is referring to). A friend of mine lives in the docklands (a new area in east London with a massive amount of new flats, having undergone substantial redevelopment in the last 10 years) and regularly complains about being a 20 minute walk from any shops or retail space. Why would you want to live in a city that you can't walk around? If you're not going to live near people (and the associated economic/social activity), why not live in the countryside where you get the benefits of space, fresh air and open space as a trade off?

graeme 9y ago
Commute distance? To get to "the country" in most north american cities you need to live 2+ hours from downtown, so it's not feasible if you work there. I live in an urban, walkable area, to be clear, so I'm not entirely sure of the motives.
- nradov 9y ago
  There are real "country" areas within a reasonable commuting distance (much less than 2 hours) of San Jose. Of course the land is quite expensive but if you've got the money it's totally possible to own a small farm or piece of forest.
  - xyhopguy 9y ago
    Within 20 miles of somewhere like Portland for that matter. My in-laws live in the Portland burbs and everything between their house and the next town is farmland.
- seqastian 9y ago
  So don't work down town?
  - CydeWeys 9y ago
    That's typically where the best jobs are (or maybe even the only jobs, depending on industry).
    - white-flame 9y ago
      That all depends on how you rank jobs for "best" status, including cost of living, nuisance of living environment, commute, socializing preferences, and effect on your family. For many, those costs and environmental factors quickly negate any wage differences compared to living and working even just a few miles outward from downtown.
CalRobert 9y ago
I agree, and have rarely been able to convince my countrymen of this. I'm in the process of looking at buying a home and increasingly it seems clear that either a dense arrangement or the countryside (if working remotely) are preferable to the burbs, where you get high costs and poor access.
- shawnee_ 9y ago
  > it seems clear that either a dense arrangement or the countryside (if working remotely) are preferable to the burbs, where you get high costs and poor access. HOAs are primarily to blame for the high cost and poor access of suburbia. Multiple gated communities all each attempting to create their own "privately-owned by the community" parks and recreation. Aside from HOA fees (which are basically taxes), the gluing together of all these private developments makes "freedom" and walkable / public access an illusion. Homeowners end up double paying and cities' infrastructure suffers from lack of funds. Density is best if it is done right, but the HOA problem incentives fracture and disconnect. Thus: all public spaces in all densely-planned areas must be publicly-owned. The HOA cannot create walled gardens.
  - jessaustin 9y ago
    There is probably some sort of follow-on effect of HOAs, but of course the original tastelessness was that of property developers. They didn't analyze the market to figure out what homebuyers wanted. Instead they figured out what they could build cheap, and convinced ignorant people to buy that. Once a family has made its one truly large investment in a shit way of life, they don't need an HOA to suggest the sunk cost fallacy.
    - tropo 9y ago
      The developer wants to minimize risk. The homebuyers will choose what they prefer: a. Without an HOA, every home is well-kept like a postcard. (possibly most desired, but unlikely to happen) b. With an HOA, every home is well-kept like a postcard. (acceptable) c. Without an HOA, some homes have a "redneck" or "ghetto" look. (undesirable) d. With an HOA, every home has a "redneck" or "ghetto" look. (won't happen) The only rational choice for the developer is "b". If they try for "a", they might only sell a few houses before somebody makes the place look threatening. That drives down the selling price for the nearby lots. The lower selling price may even increase the chance of having buyers who will also make a threatening-looking mess. I wish it weren't so. I hate how all modern housing has HOAs. Without some very unlikely changes in the law, we're stuck with the situation.
NeoBasilisk 9y ago
For many people in the US, the nearest truly walkable city is literally hours away by car.
strommen 9y ago
The suburbs are a happy medium. I have a nice yard, a quiet neighborhood, and can drive to any amenity I'd ever want in under 30 minutes. In the USA, quality of schools are another big plus for the suburbs over both rural and urban areas.
white-flame 9y ago
I enjoy being able to walk for pleasure in relative privacy and quiet, while still having full access to everything. If I want to get to a purposeful destination, I get in the car and have a quick (usually well under 10 minutes) drive to go to places which do not intrude into my personal life, space, and attention until I choose to go there. I do live in the big local non-walkable metropolis (5M+ population), in a cheap area, but I still have my elbow room, relaxed immediate environment, and quick & full access to everything. I certainly don't want to live where everything is right in my face and in my ears all the time.

graeme 9y ago

Commute distance? To get to "the country" in most north american cities you need to live 2+ hours from downtown, so it's not feasible if you work there. I live in an urban, walkable area, to be clear, so I'm not entirely sure of the motives.

nradov 9y ago
There are real "country" areas within a reasonable commuting distance (much less than 2 hours) of San Jose. Of course the land is quite expensive but if you've got the money it's totally possible to own a small farm or piece of forest.
- xyhopguy 9y ago
  Within 20 miles of somewhere like Portland for that matter. My in-laws live in the Portland burbs and everything between their house and the next town is farmland.
seqastian 9y ago
So don't work down town?
- CydeWeys 9y ago
  That's typically where the best jobs are (or maybe even the only jobs, depending on industry).
  - white-flame 9y ago
    That all depends on how you rank jobs for "best" status, including cost of living, nuisance of living environment, commute, socializing preferences, and effect on your family. For many, those costs and environmental factors quickly negate any wage differences compared to living and working even just a few miles outward from downtown.

CalRobert 9y ago

I agree, and have rarely been able to convince my countrymen of this. I'm in the process of looking at buying a home and increasingly it seems clear that either a dense arrangement or the countryside (if working remotely) are preferable to the burbs, where you get high costs and poor access.

shawnee_ 9y ago
> it seems clear that either a dense arrangement or the countryside (if working remotely) are preferable to the burbs, where you get high costs and poor access. HOAs are primarily to blame for the high cost and poor access of suburbia. Multiple gated communities all each attempting to create their own "privately-owned by the community" parks and recreation. Aside from HOA fees (which are basically taxes), the gluing together of all these private developments makes "freedom" and walkable / public access an illusion. Homeowners end up double paying and cities' infrastructure suffers from lack of funds. Density is best if it is done right, but the HOA problem incentives fracture and disconnect. Thus: all public spaces in all densely-planned areas must be publicly-owned. The HOA cannot create walled gardens.
- jessaustin 9y ago
  There is probably some sort of follow-on effect of HOAs, but of course the original tastelessness was that of property developers. They didn't analyze the market to figure out what homebuyers wanted. Instead they figured out what they could build cheap, and convinced ignorant people to buy that. Once a family has made its one truly large investment in a shit way of life, they don't need an HOA to suggest the sunk cost fallacy.
  - tropo 9y ago
    The developer wants to minimize risk. The homebuyers will choose what they prefer: a. Without an HOA, every home is well-kept like a postcard. (possibly most desired, but unlikely to happen) b. With an HOA, every home is well-kept like a postcard. (acceptable) c. Without an HOA, some homes have a "redneck" or "ghetto" look. (undesirable) d. With an HOA, every home has a "redneck" or "ghetto" look. (won't happen) The only rational choice for the developer is "b". If they try for "a", they might only sell a few houses before somebody makes the place look threatening. That drives down the selling price for the nearby lots. The lower selling price may even increase the chance of having buyers who will also make a threatening-looking mess. I wish it weren't so. I hate how all modern housing has HOAs. Without some very unlikely changes in the law, we're stuck with the situation.

NeoBasilisk 9y ago

For many people in the US, the nearest truly walkable city is literally hours away by car.

strommen 9y ago

The suburbs are a happy medium. I have a nice yard, a quiet neighborhood, and can drive to any amenity I'd ever want in under 30 minutes. In the USA, quality of schools are another big plus for the suburbs over both rural and urban areas.

white-flame 9y ago

I enjoy being able to walk for pleasure in relative privacy and quiet, while still having full access to everything. If I want to get to a purposeful destination, I get in the car and have a quick (usually well under 10 minutes) drive to go to places which do not intrude into my personal life, space, and attention until I choose to go there. I do live in the big local non-walkable metropolis (5M+ population), in a cheap area, but I still have my elbow room, relaxed immediate environment, and quick & full access to everything. I certainly don't want to live where everything is right in my face and in my ears all the time.