4 ms·
Walking everywhere is not really much of an individual decision though: It's a collective, city-wide decision, as the city's infrastructure and geography decide
by hibikir 6y ago
Walking everywhere is not really much of an individual decision though: It's a collective, city-wide decision, as the city's infrastructure and geography decides whether walking or driving are really alternatives.
I was raised in a small city in Spain, population of 180k or so. I walked everywhere, and I still do when I visit: The city has great population density, with an average height of about 6 stories, plenty of pedestrian-only streets, and almost no surface parking. The situation is such that driving would be slower than walking to get most things done, as time to and from the car will often be quite the nuisance.
Later I moved to Madrid. It's a very large city by European standards: Too big to just walk everywhere. However, it's also very dense, and it's also not all that well set up for driving in many routes. Driving might be useful at times, but the subway might be faster, and it's hard to find places that are more than 10 minutes away from a subway station. It's not quite as hostile as my hometown, but you at least might have to make choices.
Now, however, I am living in a mid-sized metro in the US midwest: far smaller than Madrid in population, but easily 4x the total size. The vast majority of the metro area is single family homes in half acre lots. Even downtown is full of surface parking lots, so even living there you'll mostly be walking past asphalt. One person could possibly move to be in walking distance of their job, but good luck doing that with two people. Public transportation is sparse, and, at the best of times, has buses every half an hour, so your typical trip penalty vs a car might be an hour each way. And on top, temperatures will hit 40C in the summer, and -20C in the winter: Not exactly good walking weather either way. Here, walking is not a mode of transportation, but a completely intentional hobby which, in some cases, might take you past a store or a restaurant, weather permitting.
So really, while I am a huge fan of walking, it's not something anyone in my metro area will willingly choose as their primary mode of transportation, and it's the same all over the US: Few of our cities are built for anything but cars, and it's a decisions that is really hard to undo without ripping apart most of the city's construction. Imagine one of our largest buildings: The headquarters of a company you probably know. well over 15 floors, but completely surrounded by surface level parking. Many thousands of spots, one for each worker. you have to walk over half a kilometer before you find any other building: otherwise it's just cars.
So no, around here, I couldn't recommend walking to pretty much anyone, and that's because the decision is made for us. It's the city's urban planning department, over many decades, that decides whether people walk or not.
- ck425 6y agoYeah that's a fair point. For me walkability is a key factor in choosing where to live. Thankfully in the UK it's pretty easy to live in walkable places.
- elric 6y ago> So no, around here, I couldn't recommend walking to pretty much anyone I don't know about that. Things don't change overnight, and never by themselves. Advocating for a more walkable city is probably a good idea. Might require political action of some sort. Or maybe it just needs a critical mass of frequent walkers. For the record, I live in a walkable city now, and grew up in a tiny, walkable villagle. Wouldn't even consider moving somewhere that wasn't walkable. Addendum: a city that isn't designed for people probably shouldn't be considered a city. I'm trying to think of a better name, but I'm stuck on expletives.
- xnyan 6y ago>I don't know about that. ...Might require political action of some sort. Wow, ok. I live in the raleigh-durham metro area. What is timeline for significant non-car travel for us of literally any kind outside of 40 years and hundreds of billions of dollars? If your answer is "there is none", everyone here already knows that. We are chained to cars with no way out. >Wouldn't even consider moving somewhere that wasn't walkable. Not joking: I am really proud of your opinion. Never change. There's not even close to enough of you to intact real transportation change in the US. I wish I was wrong about that, but it's not been my lived experience living in the US.
- afjl 6y agoYeah...my brother lives in Nashville, and they handily voted down a public transit bill recently that would have extended bus services.
- 542354234235 6y agoWhile that is a pain, I get it. Extending bus services is a band aid on a systemic problem. People don’t want to take the bus unless they have to because buses take forever compared to cars. Buses take forever because they have to stop so often. They have to stop so often because 99% of the US is totally spread out with very low density. And that is the fundamental problem. You can’t just tweak the buses or trains or walk more in a city that has built $100 billion of infrastructure around driving cars. Walkability and public transit just aren’t viable alternatives in a country built around the suburb and the highway.