6 ms·

What's hardest to find, and what I prefer, is somewhere it's easy to walk and drive. I've lived in walkable places where if you do have to drive, traffic is a n

What's hardest to find, and what I prefer, is somewhere it's easy to walk and drive. I've lived in walkable places where if you do have to drive, traffic is a nightmare. And then of course there are places where you can drive without traffic but there is nowhere to walk to. I think I prefer the latter with my lifestyle, though it becomes more frustrating for meeting friends, going our for dinner + drinks, etc. For sports / leisure, "driveable" areas are better for getting out of town and into nature faster. In bigger cities (in Canada) I never would have considered going skiing after work, but it is possible in smaller places. I find it's also easier to go to league sports in a driveable place. For running, walkable is obviously better, and one reason I like living in the city is that I can step out my door and safely go for a run, where as further out that option doesnt exist. Anyway, just my experience.

yellow_lead 5y ago
Where have you been that has both? From my reading, it seems like cities need to prioritize walkable / bikable OR cars, but I've never seen example of a city doing both well.
- newsbinator 5y ago
  Minsk does both well
- notJim 5y ago
  IMO Portland is actually kind of like this (for now). I've heard Berkeley, CA sort of, too. In Portland (where I live), I have a driveway and convenient street parking right outside my house, but I can also walk to many shops and restaurants, and have a pretty good busline nearby. I usually take the bus if I'm going downtown, so I don't have to worry about parking. But in my part of town, which is less dense, I can conveniently drive or bike. Parking can be a little annoying on this side of town, but it's usually okay. That being said, Portland is clearly moving in a denser direction. Housing has gotten too expensive here, and the only way out of that is density. Our cycling infrastructure and public transit are decent, but need to get better IMO. All of this will probably negatively impact the car-friendliness, but I think that's the right move for Portland right now.
  - verall 5y ago
    This might not be news for you, but you're in a really desireable location. The land you're on is probably really expensive right now.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      It's desirable only because they don't build the outer burbs this way. As you drive out of the city, the time of building gets later and later. When you hit some point where the homes were built in the 60s, suddenly the walkable neighborhoods, which were the standard before then, make way for huge, sidewalkless developments. If they just built more of the commenters neighborhood, and my neighborhood, there would be more desirable land. Portland is not running out of land...
- version_five 5y ago
  Ottawa, Canada is pretty good for this. It's a pretty small city but has a few neighborhoods that would be considered walkable, while in 20 minutes you can be out into the country. Compared with Toronto or Montreal where in 20 min if you're lucky you've entered a highway so you can sit in traffic for an hour to clear the city. Not sure about in the US.
- throwaway9980 5y ago
  Towns tend to be this way, not so much cities. I live in a single family neighborhood in a large city and it’s both walkable and drivable. It’s not great driving beyond a 1-2 mile radius, but I don’t need to go that far more than once a week. My kids’ schools are all walkable distances, 30 minutes tops, or a 5 minute drive. Same for the gym, restaurants, bars, the grocery stores, etc.
- antb123 5y ago
  Oulu Finland... Created equal numbers of separate human and car roads. Very possible in newer cities. https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/22/meet-the-bike-loving-finnish-city-that-keeps-pedalling-even-in-the-snow https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/22/meet-the-bike-loving-fin...
cbdumas 5y ago
I think it's hard to find because those two preferences are in direct, irresolvable conflict.
- ummonk 5y ago
  Except in really small towns.
- 8note 5y ago
  It sounds like the Netherlands has it figure out? Split out streets and roads. Roads are for driving fast, and streets are for destinations, slow driving, and walking.
  - mrgordon 5y ago
    Most Americans would say the Netherlands is tough for driving I think because the cars are smaller, the lanes are smaller, there is light rail everywhere, many pedestrians and bikers everywhere, etc. I think all these decisions are why the Netherlands are so lovely and most of America is seemingly highways, strip malls, and suburbs. One of the most popular Dutch vacations is biking around the country and camping instead of staying at hotels. It’s quite far from American car culture in that regard.
    - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
      > One of the most popular Dutch vacations is biking around the country and camping instead of staying at hotels. It’s quite far from American car culture in that regard. American car culture is to go on vacation to drive up camping spots. You can't actually camp in many places without a car. There isn't really public transit from Seattle to Mt. Ranier national park, for example, and the distances is too far and the terrain too hilly for just biking it (the Netherlands is lucky to be flat, in this regard).
      - mrgordon 5y ago
        Yes being flat does help for sure. In much of Europe I think they solve this problem with trains or sometimes buses to get to the parks or outlying areas. For example, much of Italy is hill towns and no one wants to walk up huge hills to get to each town but you can typically get there with transit. The United States admittedly is quite large and spread out but if we started to connect more things with transit then I think it would stop feeling so much this way. Like why couldn’t there be a connection from San Francisco to Tahoe that doesn’t involve driving? It’s a very very popular weekend trip and a train would be great for moving skis and other equipment. If you live near Seattle, you’re lucky to have some of the better planning in the United States and some of the more open-minded people with regards to transit, camping, etc. In a place like Florida, for example, it is fairly common to meet people who’ve never been camping unless maybe you count a music festival. The priority is often air conditioning, a nice hotel room towering over the beach, etc. which is not what the Dutch seek out for the most part
MarkLowenstein 5y ago
I've never run into a walkable city center where there was one super-obvious and convenient place to park--maybe a gigantic underground garage--and then you walk everywhere from there. Feels like that might work. The attractive city centers have nice stuff, but too few people who live within walking distance to keep them in business and in good shape. They need a way to bring in suburbanites and visitors to supplement the native population.
- dghlsakjg 5y ago
  Amsterdam has big parking lots outside the city center. If you park there you get a free transit pass into the city I believe. Makes a lot of sense really
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    Montreal is similar. Parking downtown: horrible. Parking out in the 'burbs and then riding the metro into town? easy, and lovely. For a lot of things, anyway.
    - spideymans 5y ago
      Might be a Canadian thing. Toronto is similar. If I recall correctly, Toronto operates the second most used public transit system in the United States or Canada, while the public transit authority there is the largest parking garage operator in North America. It’s a pretty good solution for medium-sized cities, but it breaks down as population increases. Toronto has largely stopped building these garages because they’ve run out of room for them after immense population and ridership growth. Toronto is a pretty big though, so it’s still a solution worth exploring for medium-sized cities that can still reasonably build these facilities.
    - antb123 5y ago
      Same with New Jersey + train into Manhattan
  - aix1 5y ago
    In Britain this is called Park & Ride (or P+R for short): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_and_ride https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_and_ride
maxerickson 5y ago
In the US, most suburban areas have plenty of low traffic streets, and many have additional recreational paths for pedestrians. When I lived in a quite rural area, it was no problem jogging on the low traffic roads, and if I wanted long runs, I could have gone ~3 miles on those roads to a converted railroad that ran for miles in either direction.
userbinator 5y ago
is somewhere it's easy to walk and drive This exhibit from 1940 might be interesting: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Street_intersection_Futurama.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Street_i...
- aix1 5y ago
  Relevant: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/02/walkways-in-the-sky-the-return-of-londons-forgotten-pedways https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/02/walkways-in-t...
- agent327 5y ago
  Hong Kong has that in some places. It makes it hard to navigate on foot, as pedestrian routes are no longer obvious lines but require entering building perpendicular to your direction, for example. However, the idea is nearly perfect. All it really needs is to put the cars in tunnels. Underground there's plenty of room for driving, parking, etc.

yellow_lead 5y ago

Where have you been that has both? From my reading, it seems like cities need to prioritize walkable / bikable OR cars, but I've never seen example of a city doing both well.

newsbinator 5y ago
Minsk does both well
notJim 5y ago
IMO Portland is actually kind of like this (for now). I've heard Berkeley, CA sort of, too. In Portland (where I live), I have a driveway and convenient street parking right outside my house, but I can also walk to many shops and restaurants, and have a pretty good busline nearby. I usually take the bus if I'm going downtown, so I don't have to worry about parking. But in my part of town, which is less dense, I can conveniently drive or bike. Parking can be a little annoying on this side of town, but it's usually okay. That being said, Portland is clearly moving in a denser direction. Housing has gotten too expensive here, and the only way out of that is density. Our cycling infrastructure and public transit are decent, but need to get better IMO. All of this will probably negatively impact the car-friendliness, but I think that's the right move for Portland right now.
- verall 5y ago
  This might not be news for you, but you're in a really desireable location. The land you're on is probably really expensive right now.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    It's desirable only because they don't build the outer burbs this way. As you drive out of the city, the time of building gets later and later. When you hit some point where the homes were built in the 60s, suddenly the walkable neighborhoods, which were the standard before then, make way for huge, sidewalkless developments. If they just built more of the commenters neighborhood, and my neighborhood, there would be more desirable land. Portland is not running out of land...
version_five 5y ago
Ottawa, Canada is pretty good for this. It's a pretty small city but has a few neighborhoods that would be considered walkable, while in 20 minutes you can be out into the country. Compared with Toronto or Montreal where in 20 min if you're lucky you've entered a highway so you can sit in traffic for an hour to clear the city. Not sure about in the US.
throwaway9980 5y ago
Towns tend to be this way, not so much cities. I live in a single family neighborhood in a large city and it’s both walkable and drivable. It’s not great driving beyond a 1-2 mile radius, but I don’t need to go that far more than once a week. My kids’ schools are all walkable distances, 30 minutes tops, or a 5 minute drive. Same for the gym, restaurants, bars, the grocery stores, etc.
antb123 5y ago
Oulu Finland... Created equal numbers of separate human and car roads. Very possible in newer cities. https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/22/meet-the-bike-loving-finnish-city-that-keeps-pedalling-even-in-the-snow https://www.euronews.com/2021/01/22/meet-the-bike-loving-fin...

cbdumas 5y ago

I think it's hard to find because those two preferences are in direct, irresolvable conflict.

ummonk 5y ago
Except in really small towns.
8note 5y ago
It sounds like the Netherlands has it figure out? Split out streets and roads. Roads are for driving fast, and streets are for destinations, slow driving, and walking.
- mrgordon 5y ago
  Most Americans would say the Netherlands is tough for driving I think because the cars are smaller, the lanes are smaller, there is light rail everywhere, many pedestrians and bikers everywhere, etc. I think all these decisions are why the Netherlands are so lovely and most of America is seemingly highways, strip malls, and suburbs. One of the most popular Dutch vacations is biking around the country and camping instead of staying at hotels. It’s quite far from American car culture in that regard.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    > One of the most popular Dutch vacations is biking around the country and camping instead of staying at hotels. It’s quite far from American car culture in that regard. American car culture is to go on vacation to drive up camping spots. You can't actually camp in many places without a car. There isn't really public transit from Seattle to Mt. Ranier national park, for example, and the distances is too far and the terrain too hilly for just biking it (the Netherlands is lucky to be flat, in this regard).
    - mrgordon 5y ago
      Yes being flat does help for sure. In much of Europe I think they solve this problem with trains or sometimes buses to get to the parks or outlying areas. For example, much of Italy is hill towns and no one wants to walk up huge hills to get to each town but you can typically get there with transit. The United States admittedly is quite large and spread out but if we started to connect more things with transit then I think it would stop feeling so much this way. Like why couldn’t there be a connection from San Francisco to Tahoe that doesn’t involve driving? It’s a very very popular weekend trip and a train would be great for moving skis and other equipment. If you live near Seattle, you’re lucky to have some of the better planning in the United States and some of the more open-minded people with regards to transit, camping, etc. In a place like Florida, for example, it is fairly common to meet people who’ve never been camping unless maybe you count a music festival. The priority is often air conditioning, a nice hotel room towering over the beach, etc. which is not what the Dutch seek out for the most part

MarkLowenstein 5y ago

I've never run into a walkable city center where there was one super-obvious and convenient place to park--maybe a gigantic underground garage--and then you walk everywhere from there. Feels like that might work. The attractive city centers have nice stuff, but too few people who live within walking distance to keep them in business and in good shape. They need a way to bring in suburbanites and visitors to supplement the native population.

dghlsakjg 5y ago
Amsterdam has big parking lots outside the city center. If you park there you get a free transit pass into the city I believe. Makes a lot of sense really
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  Montreal is similar. Parking downtown: horrible. Parking out in the 'burbs and then riding the metro into town? easy, and lovely. For a lot of things, anyway.
  - spideymans 5y ago
    Might be a Canadian thing. Toronto is similar. If I recall correctly, Toronto operates the second most used public transit system in the United States or Canada, while the public transit authority there is the largest parking garage operator in North America. It’s a pretty good solution for medium-sized cities, but it breaks down as population increases. Toronto has largely stopped building these garages because they’ve run out of room for them after immense population and ridership growth. Toronto is a pretty big though, so it’s still a solution worth exploring for medium-sized cities that can still reasonably build these facilities.
  - antb123 5y ago
    Same with New Jersey + train into Manhattan
- aix1 5y ago
  In Britain this is called Park & Ride (or P+R for short): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_and_ride https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_and_ride

maxerickson 5y ago

In the US, most suburban areas have plenty of low traffic streets, and many have additional recreational paths for pedestrians. When I lived in a quite rural area, it was no problem jogging on the low traffic roads, and if I wanted long runs, I could have gone ~3 miles on those roads to a converted railroad that ran for miles in either direction.

userbinator 5y ago

is somewhere it's easy to walk and drive This exhibit from 1940 might be interesting: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Street_intersection_Futurama.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Street_i...

aix1 5y ago
Relevant: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/02/walkways-in-the-sky-the-return-of-londons-forgotten-pedways https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/oct/02/walkways-in-t...
agent327 5y ago
Hong Kong has that in some places. It makes it hard to navigate on foot, as pedestrian routes are no longer obvious lines but require entering building perpendicular to your direction, for example. However, the idea is nearly perfect. All it really needs is to put the cars in tunnels. Underground there's plenty of room for driving, parking, etc.