what does "walkability" mean to you? (in NOVA-DC region) (Reston: high crime, townhouses)
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.
By the way, at some point in the recent discussions Springfield came up. Can't find the reference right at the moment, but hopefully some of you remember it. At any rate, I'm not that familiar with Springfield but if the area has good sidewalks/walking trails and you can easily walk to stores, why wouldn't it be considered walkable?
The only two reasons that occur to me offhand would be crime, or it isn't "cool" enough.
If it's a matter of crime, well I agree that if an area has so much crime that people are afraid to walk there, then that's a factor and we should add low crime to the list of what makes an area walkable. Not quite sure what the cut off point would be for what is and what is not low crime, though. If crime is a factor, having more or less people on the sidewalk won't help, IMO, because pedestrians will be afraid that those other people are criminals. Or, at the very least, will harass them. Is Springfield really such a bed of crime, though?
If it's a matter of being "cool" enough to be walkable, then all I have to say is: what a snobby attitude! If people in working class neighborhoods walk to the store to get their groceries, who are we to sneer at them or malign their neighborhoods as "unwalkable"? Are we saying only the "cool" people should be encouraged to go for walks? No wonder we have a national epidemic of obesity.
No, Springfield wouldn't be considered walkable because it's basically a bunch of strip malls with free parking lots between the stores and street. Same with Route1. I'd say the number one thing that makes a place "walkable" is that the front doors of the stores are right next to the sidewalk and street like you'll find in Old Town and DC. Walkable places generally have limited street parking and underground garages. Driving needs to be inconvenient and expensive. Parking lots in front of retail is a deal killer.
No, Springfield wouldn't be considered walkable because it's basically a bunch of strip malls with parking lots between the stores and street. I'd say the number one thing that makes a place "walkable" is that the front doors of the stores are right next to the sidewalk and street like you'll find in Old Town and DC. Walkable places generally have limited street parking and garages.
LOL, yes this is the "new meaning" that has been applied ever since the word "walkable" was commandeered by the pro-density group. It's one of those games people play these days--take a familiar word, redefine it so that it promotes your agenda, post a few "studies" on the internet to "back it up" and voila people now feel they are no longer able to walk in an area that up until a few years ago was considered completely walkable. Sad, IMO.
By the way, as I noted above my daily walk to work takes me past a shopping plaza with a large parking lot out front. It's bigger than a strip mall, but same idea. I walk by lots of parked cars. So what? I don't have any problem walking on the sidewalk that goes past it, not do I mind looking at the cars. That stretch of my walk is every bit as walkable as the stretch that goes past the trees.
My biggest gripe with this new attitude that you must have 100-year-old storefronts (or some other aesthetic "need") in order for a sidewalk to be walkable is this: what you are really doing is creating excuses for people not to get exercise. They can spout lots of big talk about how they wish they could go walking but gosh oh gee they can't because the stores they might walk by aren't "cool". What's next, you have to have marble statues or you can't walk to work? Or gee, maybe we'll start claiming we can only walk on streets that are lined with Jaguars and Mercedes. I can just picture it: "What, a Yugo is parked on the street I was thinking of walking down??? Oh my god, I can't go, that sidewalk is now unwalkable!!"
Hey that reminds me.... how come a sidewalk is considered unwalkable if you walk by cars parked in a lot, but it's walkable if the cars you walk by are parked along the street?
LOL, yes this is the "new meaning" that has been applied ever since the word "walkable" was commandeered by the pro-density group. It's one of those games people play these days--take a familiar word, redefine it so that it promotes your agenda, post a few "studies" on the internet to "back it up" and voila people now feel they are no longer able to walk in an area that up until a few years ago was considered completely walkable. Sad, IMO.
By the way, as I noted above my daily walk to work takes me past a shopping plaza with a large parking lot out front. It's bigger than a strip mall, but same idea. I walk by lots of parked cars. So what? I don't have any problem walking on the sidewalk that goes past it, not do I mind looking at the cars. That stretch of my walk is every bit as walkable as the stretch that goes past the trees.
My biggest gripe with this new attitude that you must have 100-year-old storefronts (or some other aesthetic "need") in order for a sidewalk to be walkable is this: what you are really doing is creating excuses for people not to get exercise. They can spout lots of big talk about how they wish they could go walking but gosh oh gee they can't because the stores they might walk by aren't "cool". What's next, you have to have marble statues or you can't walk to work? Or gee, maybe we'll start claiming we can only walk on streets that are lined with Jaguars and Mercedes. I can just picture it: "What, a Yugo is parked on the street I was thinking of walking down??? Oh my god, I can't go, that sidewalk is now unwalkable!!"
Hey that reminds me.... how come a sidewalk is considered unwalkable if you walk by cars parked in a lot, but it's walkable if the cars you walk by are parked along the street?
Because in a less walkable place the ratio of cars to people is much greater in proxmity to where they're walking. Shoppers will drive from place to place even if only two blocks. If you boil it down, in more walkable places the cars are parked parallel and in less walkable perpendicular. This may mean liberals are better parallel parkers.
Walkable areas don't require 100 year old storefronts. There are newer places like Shirlington and Slater's Lane in North Old Town that would fit my definition of highly walkable, largely because of the features I've mentioned.
Places aren't walkable because they're cool so much as they're cool because they're walkable. I will admit that cool places tend to attract people of more liberal sensibilities. That's just how things are.
Ideally, it would be a place where I could walk for coffee or basic shopping needs, but realistically I think it means are there sidewalks and side streets, and maybe a few little parks, instead of busy highways.
LOL, yes this is the "new meaning" that has been applied ever since the word "walkable" was commandeered by the pro-density group. It's one of those games people play these days--take a familiar word, redefine it so that it promotes your agenda, post a few "studies" on the internet to "back it up" and voila people now feel they are no longer able to walk in an area that up until a few years ago was considered completely walkable. Sad, IMO.
I wouldn't consider a walkable town a new concept. There are plenty of little downtowns in the Midwest and West and in VA outside of the metro area that are quite walkable and have been for the past 100 years +.
West Springfield--around Old Keene Mill Road and Rolling Road--is quite walkable. We lived near Hidden Pond Nature Center/Pohick Stream Park and could walk on the paved path to get to the tennis courts, post office, Panera, Whole Foods or Giant shopping centers. Going the opposite direction, I could walk to Pohick Library, the basketball courts, and more tennis courts. Heading south on Huntsman Blvd., I could also walk or bike to the other Giant shopping center at Huntsman/Fairfax Co. Parkway. People frequently use the path along Huntsman to get to the stores in that shopping area. It's very pretty, especially in the spring/summer/autumn. The Park and Ride lot at Sydenstricker/Fairfax Co. Parkway is also within walking or biking distance. And there are many convenient bus stops within walking distance in the area.
I walked a lot for both exercise and errands when we lived in West Springfield. When we lived in the Fort Hunt/Mount Vernon area, I used the GW Parkway path for walking/running nearly every day. There is a limited number of businesses that are within walking distance of Fort Hunt, however. It was easy to walk to the elementary and middle schools there, but it was strange how many parents drove their kids to school--even if they lived within walking distance. Maybe walking takes too much valuable time, or maybe it's easier to avoid interacting with people by driving.
"Walkability" to me means an area is safe enough to walk from one place to another, whether a person wants to do errands or simply get exercise.
LOL, yes this is the "new meaning" that has been applied ever since the word "walkable" was commandeered by the pro-density group. It's one of those games people play these days--take a familiar word, redefine it so that it promotes your agenda, post a few "studies" on the internet to "back it up" and voila people now feel they are no longer able to walk in an area that up until a few years ago was considered completely walkable. Sad, IMO.
You sound hurt that the traditional post-WWII American suburb, built on the periphery of a population-dense area, is falling into disfavor with more people.
Words mean what people choose them to mean. "Walkable" has not been commandeered - people didn't use to refer to subdivisions as "walkable" just because they could walk to their neighbors, walk to the community pool, and maybe walk to the one strip mall within 5 miles. Being able to do that was nothing special and needed no term for it. The term "walkable" just wasn't used for such places. People may have walked, but "walkability" became a concept to distinguish places with mixed-use zoning and ease of car-free living. Many people are sick of being stuck in their cars and looking for something different, or they moved here from a place with distinct towns and downtowns and do not want NOVA's built-in-a-pasture subdivision with a Hair Cuttery, Subway, and Chinese take-out in a strip mall. Walkability does not mean what you keep affirming it could, or ought to, mean.
Nobody is claiming that one cannot walk in areas you refer to. I once walked from Landmark Mall to Annandale along 236. But that feat in and of itself does not make Landmark, Lincolnia, or Annandale walkable communities.
The parts of your post deriding an imagined future requirement of marble statues and luxury cars reminds me of SCR's posts lamenting such things in NOVA. The tendency towards luxury and status symbols just comes with the territory in NOVA, it's nothing to do with how people view walkable neighborhoods. You could observe a number of our suburbs and malls and interpret that such "requirements" are in effect.
You sound hurt that the traditional post-WWII American suburb, built on the periphery of a population-dense area, is falling into disfavor with more people.
It's more a matter of being annoyed by communities being labeled "unwalkable" simply for silly reasons like they don't have storefronts along the sidewalks. I mean, really. That has got to be the dumbest reason to label a place walkable that I've ever heard of. Let me ask, is a sidewalk suddenly more walkable depending on what the stores sell? If an accountant moves out and a hipster coffee shop moves in is the sidewalk in front of the building miraculously now easier to walk on?
As said before I think labels like that are contributing to the obesity epidemic in this nation. When you label communities "unwalkable" people feel they have to stop walking. Or they use it as a handy excuse--just as bad, in my book.
I'm a big fan of walking and anything I can do to encourage people to do more walking helps promote the general health of our area, not to mention our national image. I'm very proud that our metro area regularly makes the list of Fittest Cities an one of the reasons for this is walking. So I'm really annoyed when I see people being told their neighborhoods are "unwalkable" when in fact it is quite easy to walk places in those neighborhoods.
Walkability does not mean what you keep affirming it could, or ought to, mean.
Dictionaries seems to think it does. I get it that it's hip to use this new definition, but until the definition is officially changed in dictionaries I'll stick to the one they use. Dictionaries like Websters, not some urban slang dictionary.
Just my opinion, but I think the hipster use of "walkable" and "unwalkable" is going to make the list of Words We Need To Retire by the end of the year. At least I hope so.
LOL sounds like something I once read in Orwell's "1984." I guess I take a more traditional point of view. I prefer to use the meanings that are assigned to words by a dictionary. To each his own.
By the way, other words that I find destructive are unteachable, unemployable, unlivable, undateable. I certainly hope these words do not become the "cool" new words to use, just like I hope "unwalkable" goes out of service unless you're genuinely talking about a place where it is not easy to walk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbobobbo
people didn't use to refer to subdivisions as "walkable" just because they could walk to their neighbors, walk to the community pool, and maybe walk to the one strip mall within 5 miles.
Maybe you didn't I certainly did and so did many other people I know. People who actually do a lot of walking and look for homes in communities where they can walk to the store use the proper definition of walkable all the time. I've said many times that the reason we bought our house was it was a walkable distance to my job. It's not a walk through a hip neighborhood, but it's an easy walk, which is why I can do it daily (even though hipsters would likely deem my neighborhood unwalkable. Shows what they know.) By the way, I said stores are within 1 miles, not a single strip mall 5 miles away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbobobbo
they moved here from a place with distinct towns and downtowns and do not want NOVA's built-in-a-pasture subdivision with a Hair Cuttery, Subway, and Chinese take-out in a strip mall.
Nothing wrong with wanting to move into neighborhoods with a unique character. So.... why not call them that? Call them hip, trendy, charming, loaded with independet businesses, distinctive, bohemian. Those are all great words. I just feel there's no need to infer that neighborhoods that aren't trendy are also not walkable, as if the two concepts are interchangeable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robbobobbo
Nobody is claiming that one cannot walk in areas you refer to.
You may not think so but in my opinion that's what happens. When you tell people their neighborhood is not walkable, they start feeling they can't walk there. Labels can be very destructive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVA1990
Because in a less walkable place the ratio of cars to people is much greater in proxmity to where they're walking. .
See, this is one of those things people say that just leave me baffled. Who cares how many cars there are in a parking lot? Why? What difference does it make to some one walking by how many cars are in a lot. Seriously, think about this for a moment. Is it really better to walk by 5 cars parked on the street than 5 cars in a lot? Or does it really affect your ability to walk on a sidewalk if there are 5 cars in a lot or 20 cars in a lot? If car to human ratio matter, does that mean a parking lot becomes somehow easier to walk by if there are only a few cars in it?
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.
What's next, you have to have marble statues or you can't walk to work? Or gee, maybe we'll start claiming we can only walk on streets that are lined with Jaguars and Mercedes. I can just picture it: "What, a Yugo is parked on the street I was thinking of walking down??? Oh my god, I can't go, that sidewalk is now unwalkable!!"
West Springfield is quite walkable.
I guess I take a more traditional point of view. I prefer to use the meanings that are assigned to words by a dictionary. To each his own. 
