6 ms·

How exactly did you get to “the cause of reckless driving is fat people who don’t walk everywhere?” Show your work. In most places in America walking is not a

by efitz 5y ago

How exactly did you get to “the cause of reckless driving is fat people who don’t walk everywhere?” Show your work. In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance; it’s miles from your house to the grocery store, for instance. If you live in a city this might not be obvious to you but half the country lives in the burbs or rural areas. Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. Separately, the US does have an obesity problem, and exercise would help, but the biggest issue by far is dietary sugar/carbohydrates.

goodpoint 5y ago
No. Distances are high because of low density. Sidewalks are financially unsustainable because of low density. People are obese also because they don't walk because of low density. Low density is caused by car culture pushed by car manufacturers and oil companies.
- collegeburner 5y ago
  Because I don't want to live in some 3x3 postage stamp with close neighbors and people peering in and no yard, let alone an apartment sharing walls between people. Screw high density, I've lived in it and it sucks. Oh and I am extremely fit, obesity is bad choices not "car culture".
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - goodpoint 5y ago
    You should visit other countries.
MrBuddyCasino 5y ago
> Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. What makes sidewalks expensive to maintain, relative to roads? > the biggest issue by far is dietary sugar/carbohydrates This is not clear. See this highly fascinating series on the obesity epidemic: https://slimemoldtimemold.com/2021/07/07/a-chemical-hunger-part-i-mysteries/ https://slimemoldtimemold.com/2021/07/07/a-chemical-hunger-p.... Other suspects are HFCS and seed oils.
- analog31 5y ago
  It could have to do with how they are paid for. When the sidewalks were repaired on my street, each resident received a bill, proportional to how many of the segments were in front of their house. When the road was rebuilt, the money came from Somewhere Else. Yeah, Somewhere Else is ultimately the same place, but homeowners don't see it as personally flowing out of their own pockets.
  - masklinn 5y ago
    Wow, that’s active, unbelievable, nonsense.
    - ghaff 5y ago
      I must say I was not aware that people can be responsible for the maintenance of the sidewalk in front of their house if there is one. But it's quite common to have to shovel that sidewalk (or pay someone to do it)--at least in the city--and you can be fined if you don't. It's probably an easement on your property so you're responsible for it.
      - masklinn 5y ago
        Yes having to keep the sidewalk traversable sounds like a possible duty as, as you note, you have an easement. But having to pay for it directly sounds extremely counter-productive. And even the first part is dubious really: there should be sidewalks most everywhere including non-residential locations or the like, which the city would almost certainly have to clear alongside the roadway. Surely in that case it’s more efficient and simpler to just clear everything uniformly?
        analog31 5y ago
        The situation in most US cities is that there are neighborhoods with and without sidewalks. Some subdivisions have them, others don't. And it's not like you can readily add sidewalks after the fact, without wreaking havoc. In my town, for the most part the neighborhoods without sidewalks also have extremely little car traffic, and pedestrians walk in the street without issue. The drivers also tend to behave themselves. Changing anything that requires substantially raising the city budget is hard, because the state makes many of the rules for city budgets and taxes. Adding a large seasonal workforce and equipment for clearing sidewalks would be a tough nut to crack. They do clear the sidewalks around parks, schools, and the like. There's also a matter of the preferences of residents. For instance I don't want a ton of salt poured onto the sidewalks in front of my house, and am happy to keep it clear of snow. Every 3 or 4 houses, somebody has a snowblower that rarely gets used.
_dain_ 5y ago
>Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. Doesn't this actually imply that it's the low density that is financially unsustainable, rather than the sidewalks? I mean if your settlement pattern can't even afford a place for people to walk, what the hell are you doing?
- octopoc 5y ago
  No, this is a matter of different strokes for different folks. Many people have chosen to live in low density areas even though there are no sidewalks. They have chosen for themselves what to do with their limited resources. For people who choose to live in cities because there are sidewalks there, they are the ones making the tradeoff that you like.
- lordnacho 5y ago
  Yes, I think the generous interpretation is that it isn't the sidewalk, but perhaps the sewage, water, electricity, comms, and maybe garbage collection that become expensive in less dense areas. All stuff that is related to the sidewalk, but not actually the sidewalk.
paulcole 5y ago
The idea of walking is foreign to a huge number of Americans, regardless of how fat/thin they might be. Try living in the suburbs and telling someone you’re going to walk an errand that’s 5 miles round-trip. You might as well tell them you’re going to Mars. I grew up and lived in rural/suburban Florida (god-awful weather) and I never learned to drive. I walked everywhere (no sidewalks). People whose lives revolve around cars just can’t imagine a person walking longer than the distance from the parking lot to the front door. Nearly everybody wishes they could drive less but nobody will actually drive less.
- aww_dang 5y ago
  People drive to the gym to run on a treadmill. I can allow for some circumstances where this makes sense, but that's not always the case.
  - op00to 5y ago
    I don't do treadmill, but I used to run in the street and have since stopped. I mostly row now. My reasonings for treadmill vs running in the stret - Safer than running on the street (crappy streets, ignorant drivers, etc.) - I can concentrate on running, not on staying away from getting creamed by cars. - They've got TV, I could get my garbage news fix (I don't read/watch news regularly) - They've got bathrooms, running makes me shit sometimes, if I go out in the morning. Of course, I stopped going to a gym because I do have an erg at home, and I don't really want to go to a large indoor location where people are huffing and puffing right now.
ben_w 5y ago
I tried walking around Salt Lake City when I was there, but I kept having to backtrack because the sidewalks suddenly stopped.
ericmay 5y ago
> In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance; it’s miles from your house to the grocery store, for instance. Which is because we’ve specifically built everything such that there are large distances involved which necessitate cars. You’re taking this as that natural order of things instead of a deliberate decision, which it was. We could have just built towns and cities with the right level of density instead. Even where there aren’t “large distances” involved such as the suburbs where the grocery store and doctor’s office have to be built a half mile or so away everyone has to drive because surprise surprise we’re stupid and made it so that you’re crippled and have to drive to go any distance, not just actual long distances. > Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. All the roads and highways are unsustainable too, more so, in fact. The difference is the government subsidized these instead of subsidizing sidewalks or more density to create the illusion of progress. Can’t be stagnating as a society if there’s a new road!
syshum 5y ago
I actively resist putting sidewalks in my neighborhood, and actively bought into this neighborhood because it lacks them Why? Because do not want to incur the costs of maintaining them, nor the liability that comes with them from either a city stand point, or injury standpoint If sidewalks where maintained by the city, including snow removal, and repairs, then maybe. but the fact is in most location they are an imposition on the property owner that comes with large costs and liabilities.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ericmay 5y ago
  Rules for these things vary by state. Personally I view your take on cleaning sidewalks off of snow (again which vary by state) as really concerning and antisocial. The other issue here is that you still pay for the roads, maintenance, police patrols, rest stops, expansion, environmental degradation, snow removal, insurance for cars, gas infrastructure, and all of those things related to roads but since you don’t get a specific bill in the mail with the line item for roads that you don’t think you’re paying for them or a huge cost for them. How much does it cost to have car accidents as the leading cause of death of teenagers? Who knows. But it’s gotta be more expensive than shoveling your sidewalk off.
  - syshum 5y ago
    >>and antisocial. OK And? I fully admit I am anti-social. >>The other issue here is that you still pay for the roads, maintenance, police patrols, rest stops, expansion, environmental degradation, snow removal, insurance for cars, gas infrastructure, and all of those things related to roads but since you don’t get a specific bill in the mail with the line item for roads that you don’t think you’re paying for them or a huge cost for them. The cost is not the problem for me, and I would prefer to get a bill for every single one of those items. Honestly if city employed people to remove the snow from the sidewalks and sent me a bill like they do trash collection I would have less of a problem with them. That is not what they do though... >How much does it cost to have car accidents as the leading cause of death of teenagers? Solve that problem by getting teens off the road.
Aeolun 5y ago
> it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable I call bullshit. The smallest 50 people village in the Netherlands has sidewalks. It’s not that it’s unsustainable, it’s that nobody wants to pay for it. Or that americans build too friggin big.
- kodablah 5y ago
  What about the largest 50 person village?
- joefife 5y ago
  Indeed. It's a very strange argument - sidewalks require significantly less to sustain. For a start, the build quality can be a lot lower - a sidewalk doesn't need to support lorries with 13t loads. As for maintenance, the damage to them is far less, and repairing a sidewalk would usually be a small diversion rather than the drama of a road closure. I'm not quite sure why anyone would think sidewalks are an unthinkable burden.
  - op00to 5y ago
    $350k per mile length of a 6 foot wide sidewalk. That's what people don't want to spend money on.
    - alistairSH 5y ago
      Where did you get that figure? Here's Virginia's cost guidelines for roadway[1] (2000, so the numbers are surely higher now). Even at $350k/mile, sidewalk is 2/3 the cost of a paved suburban road. 1 - https://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/gasb-roadway_values.pdf https://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/gasb-roadway_...
  - sumtechguy 5y ago
    It depends on the city/state/county you are in and the local building codes. The city I grew up in the code was to have a sidewalk in pretty much all new construction building conditions except in some very narrow ones. It was very nice. Biking/walking was easy and 'built in'. The sidewalk at my parents house I think is the original one the builder put in, in the 1940s. With a small segment replaced because tree damage. If you DIY the cost is fairly low, just a lot of work. But if you hire a contractor to do it, the cost can spiral pretty quickly. If the cost is folded into the price of the house you would not notice it much. But to add on after the fact it can be a bit of sticker shock.
rocgf 5y ago
Seeing sidewalks called financially unsustainable made my day.
- avs733 5y ago
  Sidewalks are an optional extra on road building so...in his defense...you can't build a sidewalk without a road, which makes it significantly more expensive.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - ben_w 5y ago
    Only if sidewalk is really literally just a bit to the side of the road that you walk on. As I’m not American, I don’t know if this is or isn’t how y’all use the word, but I did assume it was just the American term for a public footpath, and those don’t need to be beside a road. e.g. the north-south paved footpath between 11 and 65 Southbrook Rd: https://goo.gl/maps/JpoTcarePZZ7Neij9 https://goo.gl/maps/JpoTcarePZZ7Neij9 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.84552/-0.98156 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.84552/-0.98156 And if that isn’t what being discussed here, it ought to be, because the value is in being able to get around on foot rather than specifically to duplicate the road network. (Likewise, I don’t think it would be valid to say “ahh, but each end connects to a road”, because that’s like including the cost of the M25 in the cost of the A111).
  - rocgf 5y ago
    I guess you'd have to be European to understand just how ridiculous this sounds.
    - avs733 5y ago
      (it was sarcasm, I honestly went back and forth several times about whether to add an indicator and decided it was unbecoming) My wife and I are a one car household. On a typical day we both alt commute - I run or bike 7 miles to work and she runs/walks 3-4. We walk our daughter to and from daycare - even in the rain. These are choices we are barely able to make because we live in the near burbs of a pedestrian focused US city. The US built infrastructure isn't just 'cheap' on pedestrian safety it is actively hostile. There are neighrborhoods that resist sidewalks for 'safety' reasons where safety means - only poor people walk and poor people are criminals. When I used to live in Phoenix Arizona, It would take me both hands to count the number of times i was stopped by police while walking because I was 'suspicious'. I would say I have a scary experience at least once a week alt commuting. My bike lane to work goes from no bike lane to physically separated rails to trail to protected bike path to just suddenly ending and dumping me into traffic. It is ABSURD. I was once physically talked off my bike by a driver because I yelled at them for driving in the bikelane. The police who responded threatened to cite me for disorderly conduct. I could go on. I watch the youtube channel Not Just Bikes as a form of catharsis. I thought I had it good until I saw just how good places like the Netherlands have it.
masklinn 5y ago
> Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. That is complete nonsense. Sidewalks are not a significant additional expense to the road it’s on, even at a much lower level of build quality / complexity require very little maintenance as the only damage is environmental (pedestrians and cyclists do 6 or 7 orders of magnitude less damage to the surface than sedans do, per unit of distance, add 4 for a loaded truck).
- giantg2 5y ago
  "Sidewalks are not a significant additional expense" Depends on your definition of significant and sidewalk. It does add cost, so it's not insignificant (you can observe it with confidence). For states that are already struggling with infrastructure costs, it would not be feasible (look at PA and it's bridges). Most states or municipalities actually have codes that the sidewalk has to follow. So it it's not legally possible to build something low quality. Technically a sidewalk doesn't have to be paved at all. In many places, you have a 3-6 foot right of way on the sides of the roads - aka a sidewalk - that does not have to be paved. This can vary by state and municipality though.
  - cool_dude85 5y ago
    >Depends on your definition of significant and sidewalk. It does add cost, so it's not insignificant (you can observe it with confidence). What a bad-faith definition you're using here. By this definition if you reimbursed a road worker for a penny they dropped during their shift building the road it'd be a significant expense.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      It seems you are making a bad-faith interpretation. If you read the rest of my comment you will see I gave an example of a state that it would not be feasible to build sidewalks for all roads given the current economic situation. Furthermore, your example of a worker being reimbursed for dropping a penny seems to be entirely fictious. Do you have any actual data to support the idea that sidewalks for all roads are a feasible goal?
collegeburner 5y ago
It's also temperature. I'm not walking in 100 degrees, even 3 blocks because I'm soaked when I get there and stink.
- joefife 5y ago
  The Spanish manage?
  - op00to 5y ago
    The spanish shut down in mid day due to heat, and stay up late to take advantage of cooler nights. We can't expect every society to just emulate the spanish (who, probably unrelated to their mid day shut down, are not in an excellent financial position now.)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- paulcole 5y ago
  Get there earlier and relax in the AC? Bring a change of clothes and a stick of deodorant? Cool off with water and baby wipes in the bathroom? Deal with being sweaty and smelly. Whether that is worth it or not to you is up to you to decide. But you've just found another excuse for driving when walking is possible (not possible for everyone, but possible for some).
  - collegeburner 5y ago
    All your suggestions are lots less convenient. Carrying clothes and deoderant, having to go early and sponge bathe mtself, or putting other people off when they smell me. I shouldnt have to do those for a few blocks walk like to and from lunch.
avs733 5y ago
"In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance; it’s miles from your house to the grocery store, for instance. If you live in a city this might not be obvious to you but half the country lives in the burbs or rural areas." That seems like a problem that could be solved through zoning. Solutions that by your definition inherently put people at risk seem an easy thing to re-evaluate.
cnity 5y ago
> it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable "No way of preventing this, says person in only country where "this" happens."
- giantg2 5y ago
  Do you have evidence of this? If I'm reading the comments right, the person you're responding to called out rural areas. I believe many rural areas around the world do not have sidewalks (assuming you mean the paved kind) where there are miles between houses.
  - cnity 5y ago
    My comment was tongue-in-cheek. I don't have evidence that all countries on earth have sidewalks in all rural areas. That said -- I was born, raised, and have spent most of my life in rural UK and it would be absolutely preposterous if those areas didn't have pavements.
    - ghaff 5y ago
      It absolutely varies. I've done multiple long distance walks in the UK and I've definitely run across areas where's there's not only no sidewalk but a complete lack of shoulder between the road and a hedge or stone wall.
aww_dang 5y ago
>In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance Let's change this to a proactive mode. How far is too far to walk or cycle? What would it take for you to increase that distance?
alistairSH 5y ago
In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance Which is 100% our own fault. We could build suburbs with walkable shopping and schools, but we don't. Hell, even in my sort-of-walkable suburb (Reston, VA) sidewalks and bike lanes are both a bit of a bodge. It's on in the last year that there's a continuous sidewalk from my house to the school complex <1 mile away (but the neighborhood was built in the early 1970s). And despite that continuous sidewalk with zero major road crossings, there's still public school bus service (which actually takes longer to get kids home than walking because of the way it loops around). But, kids and parents sit patiently at the top of the street instead of walking a few blocks. Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. They're less expensive than roads by an order of magnitude. The only place they aren't feasible is true rural zones. But, the vast majority of Americans live in cities or suburbs - there's no good excuse for not having sidewalks in these areas.
dagw 5y ago
In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance; it’s miles from your house to the grocery store, for instance. That is true to an extent, but it is equally true that there are lots of areas that could be quite walkable, but aren't due to lack of infrastructure. My friend lived less than a mile from the mall, but it was impossible to walk there since it was cut off by a 4 lane road with no way for pedestrians to cross. My grandparents lived in a gated community that was literally across the road from a Walmart, but the only way to get there was to drive 1 mile up the road, turn around, and drive back.
ghaff 5y ago
It's not so much that sidewalks are financially unsustainable--at least if they're built at the same time as the road. But, for example in the semi-rural area where I live, literally no one would use a sidewalk if there were one. There's nowhere to walk other than to a neighbor and you don't need a sidewalk to do that. And it's going to be unusable for a few months a year unless it's maintained because of snow. (And I sure wouldn't want to be on the hook for maintaining/shoveling a sidewalk on my long frontage for something no one used.)
efitz 5y ago
A lot of the replies to my comment about sustainability of sidewalks have been either “bullshit, just look at the roads” or “we did this to ourselves”. I am not making a judgement about the desirability of sidewalks. Indeed I said that more would be nice. To the latter criticism, I say, yes, we did, but it doesn’t change where we are. To the former, I say that government monopoly on infrastructure (which means that taxes pay maintenance) combined with sprawl have led us in the US to a place where literally in many places the money does not exist to maintain the infrastructure that was already built, much less build new infrastructure. There are lots of essays on this; here’s one: https://fee.org/articles/the-unbearable-truth-about-infrastructure-and-urban-sprawl/ https://fee.org/articles/the-unbearable-truth-about-infrastr...

by efitz 5y ago

goodpoint 5y ago

No. Distances are high because of low density. Sidewalks are financially unsustainable because of low density. People are obese also because they don't walk because of low density. Low density is caused by car culture pushed by car manufacturers and oil companies.

collegeburner 5y ago
Because I don't want to live in some 3x3 postage stamp with close neighbors and people peering in and no yard, let alone an apartment sharing walls between people. Screw high density, I've lived in it and it sucks. Oh and I am extremely fit, obesity is bad choices not "car culture".
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- goodpoint 5y ago
  You should visit other countries.

MrBuddyCasino 5y ago

> Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. What makes sidewalks expensive to maintain, relative to roads? > the biggest issue by far is dietary sugar/carbohydrates This is not clear. See this highly fascinating series on the obesity epidemic: https://slimemoldtimemold.com/2021/07/07/a-chemical-hunger-part-i-mysteries/ https://slimemoldtimemold.com/2021/07/07/a-chemical-hunger-p.... Other suspects are HFCS and seed oils.

analog31 5y ago
It could have to do with how they are paid for. When the sidewalks were repaired on my street, each resident received a bill, proportional to how many of the segments were in front of their house. When the road was rebuilt, the money came from Somewhere Else. Yeah, Somewhere Else is ultimately the same place, but homeowners don't see it as personally flowing out of their own pockets.
- masklinn 5y ago
  Wow, that’s active, unbelievable, nonsense.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    I must say I was not aware that people can be responsible for the maintenance of the sidewalk in front of their house if there is one. But it's quite common to have to shovel that sidewalk (or pay someone to do it)--at least in the city--and you can be fined if you don't. It's probably an easement on your property so you're responsible for it.
    - masklinn 5y ago
      Yes having to keep the sidewalk traversable sounds like a possible duty as, as you note, you have an easement. But having to pay for it directly sounds extremely counter-productive. And even the first part is dubious really: there should be sidewalks most everywhere including non-residential locations or the like, which the city would almost certainly have to clear alongside the roadway. Surely in that case it’s more efficient and simpler to just clear everything uniformly?
      - analog31 5y ago
        The situation in most US cities is that there are neighborhoods with and without sidewalks. Some subdivisions have them, others don't. And it's not like you can readily add sidewalks after the fact, without wreaking havoc. In my town, for the most part the neighborhoods without sidewalks also have extremely little car traffic, and pedestrians walk in the street without issue. The drivers also tend to behave themselves. Changing anything that requires substantially raising the city budget is hard, because the state makes many of the rules for city budgets and taxes. Adding a large seasonal workforce and equipment for clearing sidewalks would be a tough nut to crack. They do clear the sidewalks around parks, schools, and the like. There's also a matter of the preferences of residents. For instance I don't want a ton of salt poured onto the sidewalks in front of my house, and am happy to keep it clear of snow. Every 3 or 4 houses, somebody has a snowblower that rarely gets used.

_dain_ 5y ago

>Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. Doesn't this actually imply that it's the low density that is financially unsustainable, rather than the sidewalks? I mean if your settlement pattern can't even afford a place for people to walk, what the hell are you doing?

octopoc 5y ago
No, this is a matter of different strokes for different folks. Many people have chosen to live in low density areas even though there are no sidewalks. They have chosen for themselves what to do with their limited resources. For people who choose to live in cities because there are sidewalks there, they are the ones making the tradeoff that you like.
lordnacho 5y ago
Yes, I think the generous interpretation is that it isn't the sidewalk, but perhaps the sewage, water, electricity, comms, and maybe garbage collection that become expensive in less dense areas. All stuff that is related to the sidewalk, but not actually the sidewalk.

paulcole 5y ago

The idea of walking is foreign to a huge number of Americans, regardless of how fat/thin they might be. Try living in the suburbs and telling someone you’re going to walk an errand that’s 5 miles round-trip. You might as well tell them you’re going to Mars. I grew up and lived in rural/suburban Florida (god-awful weather) and I never learned to drive. I walked everywhere (no sidewalks). People whose lives revolve around cars just can’t imagine a person walking longer than the distance from the parking lot to the front door. Nearly everybody wishes they could drive less but nobody will actually drive less.

aww_dang 5y ago
People drive to the gym to run on a treadmill. I can allow for some circumstances where this makes sense, but that's not always the case.
- op00to 5y ago
  I don't do treadmill, but I used to run in the street and have since stopped. I mostly row now. My reasonings for treadmill vs running in the stret - Safer than running on the street (crappy streets, ignorant drivers, etc.) - I can concentrate on running, not on staying away from getting creamed by cars. - They've got TV, I could get my garbage news fix (I don't read/watch news regularly) - They've got bathrooms, running makes me shit sometimes, if I go out in the morning. Of course, I stopped going to a gym because I do have an erg at home, and I don't really want to go to a large indoor location where people are huffing and puffing right now.

ben_w 5y ago

I tried walking around Salt Lake City when I was there, but I kept having to backtrack because the sidewalks suddenly stopped.

ericmay 5y ago

> In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance; it’s miles from your house to the grocery store, for instance. Which is because we’ve specifically built everything such that there are large distances involved which necessitate cars. You’re taking this as that natural order of things instead of a deliberate decision, which it was. We could have just built towns and cities with the right level of density instead. Even where there aren’t “large distances” involved such as the suburbs where the grocery store and doctor’s office have to be built a half mile or so away everyone has to drive because surprise surprise we’re stupid and made it so that you’re crippled and have to drive to go any distance, not just actual long distances. > Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. All the roads and highways are unsustainable too, more so, in fact. The difference is the government subsidized these instead of subsidizing sidewalks or more density to create the illusion of progress. Can’t be stagnating as a society if there’s a new road!

syshum 5y ago

I actively resist putting sidewalks in my neighborhood, and actively bought into this neighborhood because it lacks them Why? Because do not want to incur the costs of maintaining them, nor the liability that comes with them from either a city stand point, or injury standpoint If sidewalks where maintained by the city, including snow removal, and repairs, then maybe. but the fact is in most location they are an imposition on the property owner that comes with large costs and liabilities.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
ericmay 5y ago
Rules for these things vary by state. Personally I view your take on cleaning sidewalks off of snow (again which vary by state) as really concerning and antisocial. The other issue here is that you still pay for the roads, maintenance, police patrols, rest stops, expansion, environmental degradation, snow removal, insurance for cars, gas infrastructure, and all of those things related to roads but since you don’t get a specific bill in the mail with the line item for roads that you don’t think you’re paying for them or a huge cost for them. How much does it cost to have car accidents as the leading cause of death of teenagers? Who knows. But it’s gotta be more expensive than shoveling your sidewalk off.
- syshum 5y ago
  >>and antisocial. OK And? I fully admit I am anti-social. >>The other issue here is that you still pay for the roads, maintenance, police patrols, rest stops, expansion, environmental degradation, snow removal, insurance for cars, gas infrastructure, and all of those things related to roads but since you don’t get a specific bill in the mail with the line item for roads that you don’t think you’re paying for them or a huge cost for them. The cost is not the problem for me, and I would prefer to get a bill for every single one of those items. Honestly if city employed people to remove the snow from the sidewalks and sent me a bill like they do trash collection I would have less of a problem with them. That is not what they do though... >How much does it cost to have car accidents as the leading cause of death of teenagers? Solve that problem by getting teens off the road.

Aeolun 5y ago

> it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable I call bullshit. The smallest 50 people village in the Netherlands has sidewalks. It’s not that it’s unsustainable, it’s that nobody wants to pay for it. Or that americans build too friggin big.

kodablah 5y ago
What about the largest 50 person village?
joefife 5y ago
Indeed. It's a very strange argument - sidewalks require significantly less to sustain. For a start, the build quality can be a lot lower - a sidewalk doesn't need to support lorries with 13t loads. As for maintenance, the damage to them is far less, and repairing a sidewalk would usually be a small diversion rather than the drama of a road closure. I'm not quite sure why anyone would think sidewalks are an unthinkable burden.
- op00to 5y ago
  $350k per mile length of a 6 foot wide sidewalk. That's what people don't want to spend money on.
  - alistairSH 5y ago
    Where did you get that figure? Here's Virginia's cost guidelines for roadway[1] (2000, so the numbers are surely higher now). Even at $350k/mile, sidewalk is 2/3 the cost of a paved suburban road. 1 - https://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/gasb-roadway_values.pdf https://www.virginiadot.org/business/resources/gasb-roadway_...
- sumtechguy 5y ago
  It depends on the city/state/county you are in and the local building codes. The city I grew up in the code was to have a sidewalk in pretty much all new construction building conditions except in some very narrow ones. It was very nice. Biking/walking was easy and 'built in'. The sidewalk at my parents house I think is the original one the builder put in, in the 1940s. With a small segment replaced because tree damage. If you DIY the cost is fairly low, just a lot of work. But if you hire a contractor to do it, the cost can spiral pretty quickly. If the cost is folded into the price of the house you would not notice it much. But to add on after the fact it can be a bit of sticker shock.

rocgf 5y ago

Seeing sidewalks called financially unsustainable made my day.

avs733 5y ago
Sidewalks are an optional extra on road building so...in his defense...you can't build a sidewalk without a road, which makes it significantly more expensive.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- ben_w 5y ago
  Only if sidewalk is really literally just a bit to the side of the road that you walk on. As I’m not American, I don’t know if this is or isn’t how y’all use the word, but I did assume it was just the American term for a public footpath, and those don’t need to be beside a road. e.g. the north-south paved footpath between 11 and 65 Southbrook Rd: https://goo.gl/maps/JpoTcarePZZ7Neij9 https://goo.gl/maps/JpoTcarePZZ7Neij9 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.84552/-0.98156 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.84552/-0.98156 And if that isn’t what being discussed here, it ought to be, because the value is in being able to get around on foot rather than specifically to duplicate the road network. (Likewise, I don’t think it would be valid to say “ahh, but each end connects to a road”, because that’s like including the cost of the M25 in the cost of the A111).
- rocgf 5y ago
  I guess you'd have to be European to understand just how ridiculous this sounds.
  - avs733 5y ago
    (it was sarcasm, I honestly went back and forth several times about whether to add an indicator and decided it was unbecoming) My wife and I are a one car household. On a typical day we both alt commute - I run or bike 7 miles to work and she runs/walks 3-4. We walk our daughter to and from daycare - even in the rain. These are choices we are barely able to make because we live in the near burbs of a pedestrian focused US city. The US built infrastructure isn't just 'cheap' on pedestrian safety it is actively hostile. There are neighrborhoods that resist sidewalks for 'safety' reasons where safety means - only poor people walk and poor people are criminals. When I used to live in Phoenix Arizona, It would take me both hands to count the number of times i was stopped by police while walking because I was 'suspicious'. I would say I have a scary experience at least once a week alt commuting. My bike lane to work goes from no bike lane to physically separated rails to trail to protected bike path to just suddenly ending and dumping me into traffic. It is ABSURD. I was once physically talked off my bike by a driver because I yelled at them for driving in the bikelane. The police who responded threatened to cite me for disorderly conduct. I could go on. I watch the youtube channel Not Just Bikes as a form of catharsis. I thought I had it good until I saw just how good places like the Netherlands have it.

masklinn 5y ago

> Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. That is complete nonsense. Sidewalks are not a significant additional expense to the road it’s on, even at a much lower level of build quality / complexity require very little maintenance as the only damage is environmental (pedestrians and cyclists do 6 or 7 orders of magnitude less damage to the surface than sedans do, per unit of distance, add 4 for a loaded truck).

giantg2 5y ago
"Sidewalks are not a significant additional expense" Depends on your definition of significant and sidewalk. It does add cost, so it's not insignificant (you can observe it with confidence). For states that are already struggling with infrastructure costs, it would not be feasible (look at PA and it's bridges). Most states or municipalities actually have codes that the sidewalk has to follow. So it it's not legally possible to build something low quality. Technically a sidewalk doesn't have to be paved at all. In many places, you have a 3-6 foot right of way on the sides of the roads - aka a sidewalk - that does not have to be paved. This can vary by state and municipality though.
- cool_dude85 5y ago
  >Depends on your definition of significant and sidewalk. It does add cost, so it's not insignificant (you can observe it with confidence). What a bad-faith definition you're using here. By this definition if you reimbursed a road worker for a penny they dropped during their shift building the road it'd be a significant expense.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    It seems you are making a bad-faith interpretation. If you read the rest of my comment you will see I gave an example of a state that it would not be feasible to build sidewalks for all roads given the current economic situation. Furthermore, your example of a worker being reimbursed for dropping a penny seems to be entirely fictious. Do you have any actual data to support the idea that sidewalks for all roads are a feasible goal?

collegeburner 5y ago

It's also temperature. I'm not walking in 100 degrees, even 3 blocks because I'm soaked when I get there and stink.

joefife 5y ago
The Spanish manage?
- op00to 5y ago
  The spanish shut down in mid day due to heat, and stay up late to take advantage of cooler nights. We can't expect every society to just emulate the spanish (who, probably unrelated to their mid day shut down, are not in an excellent financial position now.)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
paulcole 5y ago
Get there earlier and relax in the AC? Bring a change of clothes and a stick of deodorant? Cool off with water and baby wipes in the bathroom? Deal with being sweaty and smelly. Whether that is worth it or not to you is up to you to decide. But you've just found another excuse for driving when walking is possible (not possible for everyone, but possible for some).
- collegeburner 5y ago
  All your suggestions are lots less convenient. Carrying clothes and deoderant, having to go early and sponge bathe mtself, or putting other people off when they smell me. I shouldnt have to do those for a few blocks walk like to and from lunch.

avs733 5y ago

"In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance; it’s miles from your house to the grocery store, for instance. If you live in a city this might not be obvious to you but half the country lives in the burbs or rural areas." That seems like a problem that could be solved through zoning. Solutions that by your definition inherently put people at risk seem an easy thing to re-evaluate.

cnity 5y ago

> it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable "No way of preventing this, says person in only country where "this" happens."

giantg2 5y ago
Do you have evidence of this? If I'm reading the comments right, the person you're responding to called out rural areas. I believe many rural areas around the world do not have sidewalks (assuming you mean the paved kind) where there are miles between houses.
- cnity 5y ago
  My comment was tongue-in-cheek. I don't have evidence that all countries on earth have sidewalks in all rural areas. That said -- I was born, raised, and have spent most of my life in rural UK and it would be absolutely preposterous if those areas didn't have pavements.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    It absolutely varies. I've done multiple long distance walks in the UK and I've definitely run across areas where's there's not only no sidewalk but a complete lack of shoulder between the road and a hedge or stone wall.

aww_dang 5y ago

>In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance Let's change this to a proactive mode. How far is too far to walk or cycle? What would it take for you to increase that distance?

alistairSH 5y ago

In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance Which is 100% our own fault. We could build suburbs with walkable shopping and schools, but we don't. Hell, even in my sort-of-walkable suburb (Reston, VA) sidewalks and bike lanes are both a bit of a bodge. It's on in the last year that there's a continuous sidewalk from my house to the school complex <1 mile away (but the neighborhood was built in the early 1970s). And despite that continuous sidewalk with zero major road crossings, there's still public school bus service (which actually takes longer to get kids home than walking because of the way it loops around). But, kids and parents sit patiently at the top of the street instead of walking a few blocks. Separately, it would be nice if we had more sidewalks, but they are financially unsustainable in low density areas. They're less expensive than roads by an order of magnitude. The only place they aren't feasible is true rural zones. But, the vast majority of Americans live in cities or suburbs - there's no good excuse for not having sidewalks in these areas.

dagw 5y ago

In most places in America walking is not a practical mode of transportation because of distance; it’s miles from your house to the grocery store, for instance. That is true to an extent, but it is equally true that there are lots of areas that could be quite walkable, but aren't due to lack of infrastructure. My friend lived less than a mile from the mall, but it was impossible to walk there since it was cut off by a 4 lane road with no way for pedestrians to cross. My grandparents lived in a gated community that was literally across the road from a Walmart, but the only way to get there was to drive 1 mile up the road, turn around, and drive back.

ghaff 5y ago

It's not so much that sidewalks are financially unsustainable--at least if they're built at the same time as the road. But, for example in the semi-rural area where I live, literally no one would use a sidewalk if there were one. There's nowhere to walk other than to a neighbor and you don't need a sidewalk to do that. And it's going to be unusable for a few months a year unless it's maintained because of snow. (And I sure wouldn't want to be on the hook for maintaining/shoveling a sidewalk on my long frontage for something no one used.)

efitz 5y ago

A lot of the replies to my comment about sustainability of sidewalks have been either “bullshit, just look at the roads” or “we did this to ourselves”. I am not making a judgement about the desirability of sidewalks. Indeed I said that more would be nice. To the latter criticism, I say, yes, we did, but it doesn’t change where we are. To the former, I say that government monopoly on infrastructure (which means that taxes pay maintenance) combined with sprawl have led us in the US to a place where literally in many places the money does not exist to maintain the infrastructure that was already built, much less build new infrastructure. There are lots of essays on this; here’s one: https://fee.org/articles/the-unbearable-truth-about-infrastructure-and-urban-sprawl/ https://fee.org/articles/the-unbearable-truth-about-infrastr...