5 ms·

There is huge demand for people to live in dense walkable areas that can't be met because of restrictive zoning. You may not want to live like that, but plenty

There is huge demand for people to live in dense walkable areas that can't be met because of restrictive zoning. You may not want to live like that, but plenty of people do. We should allow them.

throwawaysea 5y ago
> You may not want to live like that, but plenty of people do. We should allow them. I suspect that number is a lot lower than is claimed. It's only a very loud set of vocal urbanist activitsts who clamor for these changes and create the illusion of that demand. The reality is most people grow out of wanting to live in dense areas and walkability is very overrated. In fact walk scores basically don't matter when people actually shop for a house compared to other factors (price, size, location, schools, etc). And as people age and want to establish a family, the urban life quickly loses its attractiveness. The real question is why should any neighborhood have to 'allow' anyone who wants to live there to do so? Am I entitled to living beachfront in Maui just because I want to? Should they have to change their zoning to permit that? I feel like incumbent residents have a right to maintain their neighborhood character, density, and quality of life. Those things get eroded when you have an influx of new residents and different density - you end up with streets, parks, and other amenities that no longer work the way they're supposed to. What I see happening is that a city will build itself over time into something very attractive, and newcomers want a piece of that, so they demand zoning changes at the cost of the incumbents who made that place attractive in the first place.
- runako 5y ago
  > walk scores basically don't matter when people actually shop for a house compared to other factors (price, size, location, schools, etc) This is not supported by home prices in many housing markets. The walkable parts of cities tend to be among the most expensive in every metro area. Realtors even have a phrase for not being able to afford to live in the dense metro core: "drive until you qualify" (for a mortgage, given your income). This is also weird thing to note given that real estate websites pay to license walk scores presumably because they believe that home buyers want this information.
  - bluGill 5y ago
    > The walkable parts of cities tend to be among the most expensive in every metro area. That doesn't prove anything. We don't allow very many walkable spaces, so by supply and demand it only takes a few people who actually like walkable spaces to drive the prices up. I think the idea that people like walkable spaces is correct, but it is hard to prove it.
- mixmastamyk 5y ago
  If that were true there’d be no need to outlaw it!
- xboxnolifes 5y ago
  From a US perspective, I think walkability score is overrated because walkability scores are ridiculously inflated. There are like 5 places in the entire country I would consider actually walkable (and they aren't affordable), yet many places will have a good or great "walkability score". And walkability is a tradeoff for space. Pretty much everyone in my family are Single-family home for life kind of people, but they all enjoy visiting walkable places and talk about how nice they are. I guess what I'm trying to say is, it's not that people don't value walkability, it's that there are very, very few good walkable places to live. Would even go as far to say close to none, but I'm sure some smaller towns are out there that go under the radar.
  - mrep 5y ago
    I agree that walkability is bad. IMO, it should be 0-100 based on the minutes to walk to a grocery store with the score being minutes it takes to walk to a grocery store. The lower the better.

There is huge demand for people to live in dense walkable areas that can't be met because of restrictive zoning. You may not want to live like that, but plenty of people do. We should allow them.

throwawaysea 5y ago

> You may not want to live like that, but plenty of people do. We should allow them. I suspect that number is a lot lower than is claimed. It's only a very loud set of vocal urbanist activitsts who clamor for these changes and create the illusion of that demand. The reality is most people grow out of wanting to live in dense areas and walkability is very overrated. In fact walk scores basically don't matter when people actually shop for a house compared to other factors (price, size, location, schools, etc). And as people age and want to establish a family, the urban life quickly loses its attractiveness. The real question is why should any neighborhood have to 'allow' anyone who wants to live there to do so? Am I entitled to living beachfront in Maui just because I want to? Should they have to change their zoning to permit that? I feel like incumbent residents have a right to maintain their neighborhood character, density, and quality of life. Those things get eroded when you have an influx of new residents and different density - you end up with streets, parks, and other amenities that no longer work the way they're supposed to. What I see happening is that a city will build itself over time into something very attractive, and newcomers want a piece of that, so they demand zoning changes at the cost of the incumbents who made that place attractive in the first place.

runako 5y ago
> walk scores basically don't matter when people actually shop for a house compared to other factors (price, size, location, schools, etc) This is not supported by home prices in many housing markets. The walkable parts of cities tend to be among the most expensive in every metro area. Realtors even have a phrase for not being able to afford to live in the dense metro core: "drive until you qualify" (for a mortgage, given your income). This is also weird thing to note given that real estate websites pay to license walk scores presumably because they believe that home buyers want this information.
- bluGill 5y ago
  > The walkable parts of cities tend to be among the most expensive in every metro area. That doesn't prove anything. We don't allow very many walkable spaces, so by supply and demand it only takes a few people who actually like walkable spaces to drive the prices up. I think the idea that people like walkable spaces is correct, but it is hard to prove it.
mixmastamyk 5y ago
If that were true there’d be no need to outlaw it!
xboxnolifes 5y ago
From a US perspective, I think walkability score is overrated because walkability scores are ridiculously inflated. There are like 5 places in the entire country I would consider actually walkable (and they aren't affordable), yet many places will have a good or great "walkability score". And walkability is a tradeoff for space. Pretty much everyone in my family are Single-family home for life kind of people, but they all enjoy visiting walkable places and talk about how nice they are. I guess what I'm trying to say is, it's not that people don't value walkability, it's that there are very, very few good walkable places to live. Would even go as far to say close to none, but I'm sure some smaller towns are out there that go under the radar.
- mrep 5y ago
  I agree that walkability is bad. IMO, it should be 0-100 based on the minutes to walk to a grocery store with the score being minutes it takes to walk to a grocery store. The lower the better.