5 ms·
You're wrong. People want to live in walkable cities. Property prices prove this.
by woah 5y ago
You're wrong. People want to live in walkable cities. Property prices prove this.
- cozzyd 5y agoAnd the reason people often move out with kids is that it's too expensive to own a large-enough property for most people due to the high demand for walkable places.
- adgjlsfhk1 5y agothere's a very simple solution then. build more walkable places.
- cozzyd 5y agoIf only it were so simple. Building walkable places is illegal almost everywhere in the US due to onerous parking minimums, regulations about street design and restrictive zoning. It's still possible to build walkable places with highrises, but low-rise walkable areas like https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9181247,-87.6517955,3a,60y,71.84h,95.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqinRW2vFZUSuqeKA70edlQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9181247,-87.6517955,3a,60y,7... are almost lost art in the US. There are entire major metro areas in the US with no street like this.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- captainmuon 5y agoI wonder why nobody just changes these regulations. Sure it's difficult and you won't get a majority in most places, but I find it hard to understand why not at least some cities designate a small area as a "model community" and relax zoning and parking requirements.
- cozzyd 5y agoThis is happening to some extent (e.g. Chicago removing parking minimums near transit stations, Houston removing parking minimums in two downtown-adjacent neighborhoods) but mainly only in large cities. Parking minimums are especially onerous since they almost ensure you can only build strip malls for retail.
- mcv 5y agoExactly. And it's those policies that need to change. But because this is such a lost art, and because Americans have been raised to believe in the car-centric suburban dream, most people don't even know that this is an option. It's a policy issue, but also an awareness issue.
- treis 5y agoWalkable places are inherently more expensive because they lack economy of scale. It's why Dunkin Donuts can sell a dozen for $10 but it costs ~$20 for half a dozen at my local walkable place. Granted, there is a quality of ingredients difference but not 4x the cost.
- cozzyd 5y agoThere are plenty of Dunkin Donuts stores in walkable places. I have a Dunks across the street from my condo and another one around the corner (and several others several blocks away). (I live in this area, which is VERY walkable: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8822495,-87.6254941,1122a,35y,3.11h/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8822495,-87.6254941,1122a,35...) It's true there are also other, superior, options, but that's a bonus!
- wilkommen 5y agoNo, it's the suburbs that lack economy of scale. The walkable areas contribute far more per acre in taxes than the suburbs. They also require fewer resources to maintain per person because they're physically smaller. The suburbs have such a paucity of "economies of scale" that municipalities around the country have gone into debt to support them. The reason donuts cost more at your local walkable place is because real estate prices are higher in walkable places, because walkable places are so in-demand that as a nation we've bid the prices of those places to the moon. So we ought to change our zoning rules so that the market can build more of them. That's the whole point of Strong Towns idea.
- QuarterReptile 5y agoPlus the Dunkin Donuts was gifted expensive public infrastructure since, in all likelihood, they have a 10 year tax incentive that prevents them from paying almost any property taxes.
- cozzyd 5y agoDunkin Donuts also doesn't bake their donuts on premises (with a few exceptions). Surprise, you can get even cheaper (and shittier) donuts at the dollar store!
- occz 5y agoIt's illegal to build them under most zoning laws in the U.S.
- fragmede 5y agoIs that actually true? That's absolutely true in SF, but the Bay Area is bonkers for lots of reasons, housing prices is a well known one so I want to be careful about extrapolating from there.
- danielvaughn 5y agoIt's true. The Not Just Bikes channel has a video on walkable neighborhoods in the US. They're all massively expensive because of the high quality of life. edit: here it is - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0
- treis 5y agoBut they choose not to. US population is roughly 1/2 suburban, 1/4 rural, and 1/4 urban. Which backs up my point.
- occz 5y ago>But they choose not to. US population is roughly 1/2 suburban, 1/4 rural, and 1/4 urban. Which backs up my point. With single-family zoning being the norm in the U.S, it would be unfair to call this a choice. The supply of other types of housing is severely constrained.
- whatshisface 5y agoThere may be forces at work behind that other than individual home preferences.
- cozzyd 5y agoThere are entire metro areas where there are effectively zero walkable areas. People there don't have much of a choice at all!
- hannasanarion 5y agoHow much of that is "choice"? People can only live in places that exist, and places that exist must be constructed in compliance with certain government standards, and the government standards for the US for the last fifty years have been all cars, all the time. In most places, it is illegal to build a house without a garage, or a bar without a parking space for every stool. The law mandates that everyone drive everywhere whether they want to or not.
- treis 5y agoNone of this is true. You can easily find dense walkable places to live. You will just pay more money for a much smaller house. Your living expenses will be higher. And you'll have to rely on public transportation which is a pain in the ass when you have small kids. It's easy to see why people choose the suburbs.