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.
Walkable neighborhoods and single family detached homes don't work unless you all want to stuff yourself in a house. The only place where it really exists is in San Fran where multiple people shack up together. This is hardly repeatable. This is why most of the US scores terrible on walk scores.
Quite obvious.
What do you mean by "stuff yourself into a house?" My neighborhood is walkable and homes are about 1500-2500 sq ft. with lot sizes of about 4-500 sq ft. We're hardly "stuffed." You can't have large estates and walkability, but you can certainly have reasonably sized SFHs.
Walkable neighborhoods and single family detached homes don't work unless you all want to stuff yourself in a house. The only place where it really exists is in San Fran where multiple people shack up together. This is hardly repeatable. This is why most of the US scores terrible on walk scores. Quite obvious.
If one zooms in on WalkScore maps one can see where many established older neighborhoods chock full of single family homes in many cities across the country are in fact quite walkable (with scores of 70-75+), to downtown areas, grocery stores, restaurants and shops. It's not something relegated to high density housing in the mega cities and can be found all the way down to small towns as well. Examples off the top of my head...
Chapel Hill NC
Charlottesville VA
Durham NC
Asheville NC
Columbia SC
Arlington VA
Alexandria VA
Rockville MD
Bethesda MD
Bryn Mawr PA
Jenkintown PA
Bloomington IN
Columbus OH
Obviously these places are not that great for walkability. None could even reach a 70 C- score. Sure, if you lived directly downtown then you would have walkability. But obviously most people are not living in that way, otherwise this wouldn't be the case.
And how many people are moving to these cities? Where are people moving to? Texas, places like Austin which scores a 39 on walk score. None could support a subway, they might barely have a light rail. This is not a serious argument that Americans are favoring walkability.
Is anyone going to seriously argue that Texas cities are walkable? Yet they are where everyone is moving. The NC triangle is not walkable, Nasheville- not walkable.
Walkable neighborhoods and single family detached homes don't work unless you all want to stuff yourself in a house. The only place where it really exists is in San Fran where multiple people shack up together. This is hardly repeatable. This is why most of the US scores terrible on walk scores.
Quite obvious.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Walkable just means you can walk to transit and shops. It doesn't mean dense or urban. Most neighborhoods made before the second world war are walkable and they are for the most part still low density and have single detached homes.
A lot of US cities could be made walkable if:
1. Put garages in the rear or side rather than the front
2. Decrease set backs
3. Sidewalks on all roads/streets
4. Place stores through out city/town rather than just in the middle of nowhere that can only be reached via car
5. crosswalks/medians/islands on all roads where appropriate
6. Put parking in rear, side, or underground for stores especially big box stores.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Walkable just means you can walk to transit and shops. It doesn't mean dense or urban. Most neighborhoods made before the second world war are walkable and they are for the most part still low density and have single detached homes.
A lot of US cities could be made walkable if:
1. Put garages in the rear or side rather than the front
2. Decrease set backs
3. Sidewalks on all roads/streets
4. Place stores through out city/town rather than just in the middle of nowhere that can only be reached via car
5. crosswalks/medians/islands on all roads where appropriate
6. Put parking in rear, side, or underground for stores especially big box stores.
Transit and shops are highly dependent on density. If people want to try to dislodge density from walkability, fine then. But you are making a fundamentally wrong assertion.
If people seriously believe this, then LA is a walkers paradise. BTW it scored a 66 on walk score, so it would beat plenty of other places. Yet somehow, people think it is so car-dependent and so on.
Transit and shops are highly dependent on density. If people want to try to dislodge density from walkability, fine then. But you are making a fundamentally wrong assertion.
If people seriously believe this, then LA is a walkers paradise. BTW it scored a 66 on walk score, so it would beat plenty of other places. Yet somehow, people think it is so car-dependent and so on.
Well, there's a big difference between a walkable neighborhood and a walkable city.
You mention LA. There are plenty of neighborhoods in LA where you can get by without a car ... if you never venture to another zip code. The reason LA is so car-dependent is because mass transit is inadequate and your job could be five miles from your home. That's a key difference between LA and New York.
There's no reason that LA couldn't put in a mass transit system (besides the obvious one: cost) because it has the population numbers to support it. Same thing with Atlanta. But it has nothing to do with houses vs. apartments. For instance, in large parts of Queens (the NYC borough), most people live in houses. But it's still walkable and you can still get around without a car -- like, really get around without a car -- because the infrastructure is there.
You can live in a walkable neighborhood with single detached homes. Your question is loaded.
Exactly and this is an example: https://goo.gl/maps/vixhDUuuNHH2 It is literally walking distance from a business district and other businesses/places in that neighborhood. It is also walking distance from a major university and a bus line as well.
Transit and shops are highly dependent on density. If people want to try to dislodge density from walkability, fine then. But you are making a fundamentally wrong assertion.
If people seriously believe this, then LA is a walkers paradise. BTW it scored a 66 on walk score, so it would beat plenty of other places. Yet somehow, people think it is so car-dependent and so on.
Ummm you do know that LA is 2nd or 3rd densest city in the country right?
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.
