3 ms·
In a walkable city you don't need to go from one end of the city to the other. 10 mi. is insanity. You should be able to go a maximum of 2 mi. and find what you
by Karrot_Kream 8y ago
In a walkable city you don't need to go from one end of the city to the other. 10 mi. is insanity. You should be able to go a maximum of 2 mi. and find what you're looking for. I'm in a biking-density neighborhood, and have multiple grocery stores, convenience stores, restaurants, and furniture stores within 1 mi. of me. In a walking density neighborhood, I would expect that to all be available within 0.5 mi. of me.
- thereisnospork 8y agoNobody needs to do much of anything, but people want to. 10 miles is 130th st to downtown Manhattan, a distance people most certainly either want or need to travel regularly. Even in the most culture/store/apartment dense corner of the country. Now I'm all for effective public transit and dense neighborhoods, but walking and/or biking are simply worse for a lot of use cases.
- Karrot_Kream 8y agoI'm not familiar with Manhattan, are you describing the phenomenon of building dense commuter urban-areas and far-flung residential areas? Because that is not part of being a walkable neighborhood. But what stops public transit from being the solution here? In fact, over a 10 mi. radius, public transit scales much better than single-occupancy vehicles, and even fully loaded sedans. Go to Tokyo and folks take trains all day. If you're taking about low-to-medium density areas (which isn't a city) then yes, cars are the most effective.