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.
The last time I was in WalMart, there were way too many people walking around. It's a bit hard to make out way back there, but there's really a WalMart there behind that parking lot.
I'll continue to completely disagree that this place is walkable. That's just going to have to be an agree to disagree thing. You're never going to convince me that's what most people mean by walkable.
^^And do note that many students can't wait to get out of the dorms, or into suites or whatever. There are plenty of other places to congregate besides the hallways of the dorms.
I wasn't saying the dorms were the most universally desired location, only that they're an example of a commons which serves a social function.
Dorms are interesting though, because they're sort of structured like housing in a traditional agricultural village. In traditional villages, shelters are very small (often only one room) and places you go only to sleep, and possibly to eat with your family. Your entire social life was spent outside, unless weather was particularly miserable.
Hell, from what I have read regarding U.S. architectural history, one of the early innovations of colonial (Georgian) houses was to make houses larger, with more rooms. The reason being the climate in the Northeastern U.S. was so much worse in the winter than Britain that socialization needed to take place indoors for part of the year, and traditional 1-2 room British houses were too small to entertain guests.
It's also located right near one of the major highways through the District. So.... yes?
The entrance is on Florida Avenue, which is not a major highway (nor is New York Avenue for that matter). They could have simply created a less intrusive curb cut just as they've done with every other building in the city.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
That is a tough one, it could depend on how big the parking garage is for this building, and it could be a zoning law of some sort that requires the two lane driveway, especially based on the location of the garage entrance.
I doubt there's a zoning law that requires a two lane driveway. I've never seen that before in an urban area. I can't really think of a reason why they would do it that way.
Last edited by BajanYankee; 10-15-2014 at 10:11 AM..
Note the authors have no background in urban planning or a related field.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
Nor were they claiming so, nor were they publishing in an urban planning journal.
Note the authors did what researchers are supposed to do. They came up with an idea and tested it to see if it was true. In their case, the answer was "no". That's not what you hope will happen with that type of research. However, it's why you do research instead of relying on "common sense", and the like to form policy.
The entrance is on Florida Avenue, which is not a major highway (nor is New York Avenue for that matter). They could have simply created a less intrusive curb cut just as they've done with every other building in the city.
I doubt there's a zoning law that requires a two lane driveway. I've never seen that before in an urban area. I can't really think of a reason why they would do it that way.
From the looks of it, I would guess the garage had a separate in and out which would require the driveway to have two lanes.
I happen to agree that walkability is subjective. A location could be very walkable to most people, but if none of the destinations are of interest to you, then it's not walkable to you.
Good design is the same way. Not everyone agrees about what "good design" is.
So, if you need solid, black and white, concrete terms to discuss a topic, then perhaps urban planning (and architecture) aren't topics for you.
I happen to agree that walkability is subjective. A location could be very walkable to most people, but if none of the destinations are of interest to you, then it's not walkable to you.
Good design is the same way. Not everyone agrees about what "good design" is.
So, if you need solid, black and white, concrete terms to discuss a topic, then perhaps urban planning (and architecture) aren't topics for you.
...or concede that the label is subjective and quit debating whether the area is "walkable". However, some posters insist that the label is objective and then want to argue whether something is or is not based upon personal subjective preferences.
Although the topic is "What makes a place or space walkable?" it is inherently asking "What makes a place or space walkable for you?" I don't necessarily need a paved path or anything "interesting" to walk to - either you can traverse the route by walking or not. From a design standpoint, however, if the area was to promote public gathering, etc. I would expect it to be paved, to utilize ramps instead of steps, to be relatively wide to accommodate strollers, wheelchairs, etc. Those features are objective - but other characteristics cast as "objective" are quite subjective and will vary with age, gender, perhaps familial status, economics, employment, phobias, personal preferences, and other characteristics personal to the individual.
I happen to agree that walkability is subjective. A location could be very walkable to most people, but if none of the destinations are of interest to you, then it's not walkable to you.
Good design is the same way. Not everyone agrees about what "good design" is.
So, if you need solid, black and white, concrete terms to discuss a topic, then perhaps urban planning (and architecture) aren't topics for you.
Walkability is subjective on an individual level, but it is objective on a macro level. One is able to look at very specific things about an area to understand how walkable it is.
...or concede that the label is subjective and quit debating whether the area is "walkable". However, some posters insist that the label is objective and then want to argue whether something is or is not based upon personal subjective preferences.
Although the topic is "What makes a place or space walkable?" it is inherently asking "What makes a place or space walkable for you?" I don't necessarily need a paved path or anything "interesting" to walk to - either you can traverse the route by walking or not. From a design standpoint, however, if the area was to promote public gathering, etc. I would expect it to be paved, to utilize ramps instead of steps, to be relatively wide to accommodate strollers, wheelchairs, etc. Those features are objective - but other characteristics cast as "objective" are quite subjective and will vary with age, gender, perhaps familial status, economics, employment, phobias, personal preferences, and other characteristics personal to the individual.
No. There are lots of topics that are subjective, that are continually debated. There's no need to silence this one.
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.
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.
