U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-03-2017, 05:22 PM
 
56,660 posts, read 80,973,859 times
Reputation: 12521

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivory Lee Spurlock View Post
I agree wholeheartedly. It is so much quicker and easier and a heck of a lot more convenient to be outside in 90 degree plus temperatures in nothing more than a t shirt, shorts and flip flops than having to dress in layers of clothing, including gloves, ski mask and snow boots in order to walk around outside in zero degree weather.

I find it so much easier to beat the heat and humidity in the summer than to fight the cold, wind, ice and snow in the winter.
This is kind of an exaggeration of winter weather for many of the Northern cities being referred to. However, the thing that would hinder walkability in Northern cities is clearance of snow on sidewalks, as the municipal system for clearing them is a key in terms of maintaining walkability through the winter. This will depend on the amount of snowfall as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-03-2017, 05:25 PM
 
10,063 posts, read 4,671,845 times
Reputation: 15319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivory Lee Spurlock View Post
I agree wholeheartedly. It is so much quicker and easier and a heck of a lot more convenient to be outside in 90 degree plus temperatures in nothing more than a t shirt, shorts and flip flops than having to dress in layers of clothing, including gloves, ski mask and snow boots in order to walk around outside in zero degree weather.

I find it so much easier to beat the heat and humidity in the summer than to fight the cold, wind, ice and snow in the winter.
that why americans seem to dress like slobs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2017, 05:26 PM
 
Location: In the heights
22,154 posts, read 23,683,428 times
Reputation: 11625
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLSFan View Post
"communal" yards don't count to me, it's no different than going to a park
Nah, I mean when people own the rowhouse and the yard is just theirs. It used to be a lot more commonplace in NYC, but the real estate prices and family sizes makes that unlikely these days. Also, even when they are converted to multiple units, a lot of times only the ground floor is allowed to use the yard (since people have to pass through someone’s dwelling to use it.

I know several people in Philadelphia who have the whole rowhouse (those trinity houses are adorable), and all of three people who own and live in their entire own rowhouse in Brooklyn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2017, 05:27 PM
 
Location: In the heights
22,154 posts, read 23,683,428 times
Reputation: 11625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivory Lee Spurlock View Post
I agree wholeheartedly. It is so much quicker and easier and a heck of a lot more convenient to be outside in 90 degree plus temperatures in nothing more than a t shirt, shorts and flip flops than having to dress in layers of clothing, including gloves, ski mask and snow boots in order to walk around outside in zero degree weather.

I find it so much easier to beat the heat and humidity in the summer than to fight the cold, wind, ice and snow in the winter.
I feel the opposite way—I can’t take off layers of skin and flesh for the heat and humidity, but I can put on layers for the cold.

I swear by that heattech stuff from Uniqlo. Super lightweight, thin, and warm.

Regardless, it’s good that some cities in the south are working towarda having more walkable neighborhoods. I remember Richmond being pretty great for a smaller city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2017, 07:07 PM
 
3,784 posts, read 3,009,395 times
Reputation: 2507
I think this is more of a general thing too though, that things are structured that way, perhaps because in part of the climate? In a southern city, it would seem to matter less about walking a distance between places in the elements, vs. a place like London, Paris, etc., that do have cooler climates, but have stuff so close together that it doesn't feel as taxing to walk a great distance to something vs. how it would feel if it were more spread out. I don't know exactly, but of course, there are a number of cities in Latin America that have this too and offset that theory, so I would ultimately it was places that developed pre automobile, and the American north did that much more so than the American south.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2017, 08:04 PM
 
1,593 posts, read 835,022 times
Reputation: 1220
I'm sure it's already been said, cities in the north and Midwest developed before cars. People actually walked to work. Then after air conditioning when the sunbelt cities were developing in the 80 s malls with big parking were all the rage. Now the subnet cities are putting in urban neighborhoods.

It's all about when the cities grew up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2017, 08:09 PM
 
1,593 posts, read 835,022 times
Reputation: 1220
"Urban renewal" killed the Westend in Boston. And the shopping outlets that have since gone out of business killed urban downtown Worcester.

For urban walkable cities in the northeast the 60's 70's and 80's weren't friends
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 06:24 AM
 
Location: "The Dirty Irv" Irving, TX
2,808 posts, read 1,308,178 times
Reputation: 3211
Quote:
Originally Posted by That_One_Guy View Post
NYC is easily mostly apartments/condos. Usually in the style of tenements, brownstones, townhouses, highrises, rowhomes, or generic walkups. But they easily outnumber SFHs. The only borough where SFHs rule is Staten Island. Queens would be next as it is very mixed with housing style, but many homes in Queens that appear as SFHs are actually apartments. BK and BX do see them, but they are somewhat of a rarity, and are only really in the far outskirt areas. And then Manhattan has only one SFH on the whole Island. A giant mansion in The UWS.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schinasi_Mansion
I guess I wasn't making a distinction between single family homes and detached single family homes. To me there is a big difference between living in a walk up apartment and owning a brown stone, but I'm sure to lots of people there is no big difference.

Anyway, again, NYC isn't a great example to compare most places to, it's too unique.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 09:29 AM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
3,948 posts, read 2,222,087 times
Reputation: 2616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simpsonvilllian View Post
I thought this conversation was about CBDs, downtown areas.

Desirability for walkability outside of downtown areas seems more related to if you want to drive a car or not.

From a time standpoint, driving is generally going to be quicker and it seems like going to a grocery store or a Home Depot type store would be problematic without a vehicle, if you are buying a lot of stuff or large items.
sorry that I mislead you. I brought up CBD because usually urban=high walkability, but it's not limited to that, for instance a small town can be considered very walkable. Also the most walkable neighborhoods tend to be near the CBD, that's why I brought it up. But another way of increasing walkability would be urban villages, Seattle has a few so I will show you what I'm talking about

So this right here would be the main urban center, which contains the CBD, but also other urban neighborhoods adjacent to it.
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6121.../data=!3m1!1e3

here is the urban village of Ballard
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6641.../data=!3m1!1e3

University district
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6602.../data=!3m1!1e3

West Seattle
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5612.../data=!3m1!1e3

plus other smaller "downtowns" sprinkled across the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 10:23 AM
 
613 posts, read 508,271 times
Reputation: 715
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_General View Post
"Urban renewal" killed the Westend in Boston. And the shopping outlets that have since gone out of business killed urban downtown Worcester.

For urban walkable cities in the northeast the 60's 70's and 80's weren't friends
Is it fair to say that Worcester is the least walkable city in New England ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top