Our neighborhood is an excellent example of the failure to fully consider walkability and bikeability. We have good sidewalks in our neighborhood and a shopping center within a mile. The development between us and the shopping center also has good sidewalks, but the only "safe" way between the two developments is a muddy dirt trail of 100yds or less. As for biking, there is a so-called bike lane on the road bordering our developments and shopping center, but it has narrow inside corners with overhanging brush and zero visibility for drivers at the 40MPH speed limit. The lanes also end and resume around turn lanes and major intersections, making them doubly unsafe.
The American sprawl is spectacular because it involves building new suburbia. European sprawl is subtler, it is moving to villages close to the cities, the villages do not get incorporated into the city, yet in practice they are part of it.
So there is demonstrated preference.
The result is bad behaviour. Not exactly crime, more like loud drunks throwing up on the pavement.
So the sprawl could only be stopped by making everybody behave exceedingly well, and I think that is not happening.
It would be better to take jobs out of the city and stop commuting that way.
I agree. Urbanism (TM) distracts. It’s a discourse demon. People love to argue about it, to shame fatties about driving instead of walking. But urbanism follows density; it doesn’t precede it. Once enough people live in an area, they’ll try to shut down the stroads, give up their cars & parking and invest in transit, all without prodding. If only Manhattan voted on congestion pricing, it would have already happened. And you’re right that urbanism makes allowing density seem like a weird preference, rather than idk empowering people to live where they want.
I think your metrics on walking are a bit off. Standard walking pace is about 3 miles per hour or a 20 minute mile. Seniors are slower. That generally means most services need to be with a mile (or 1.6 KM) to have a truly walkable city. Bikes extend that range, but again, seniors tend to avoid bikes (balance issues, etc.). If you start from that metric, and have zoning that allows all types of residences and business in a 1 mile radius you start to solve the car problem for living, and reduce it to work commuting and to "special services". This is basically a European city, designed for walkers, with overlays of public transport for commuting and services to higher density "centers".
Asian cities are a different result. They started with the "walk" design and they layered public transport on top. So they have more dense public transport and less highways. The highways tend to have the same failures as US highways I believe (congestion, etc.)
Over 45 years ago, I worked for a newspaper in Ocean City, MD. My co-workers and I always headed for The Back Porch restaurant/bar and other spots in Rehoboth, which was a different planet altogether from the gross exponential overdevelopment that is present today. Rehoboth was charming, quiet, and nice.
The things that truly freaked me out: the terrible quality and sulfurous smell of the tap water that stained the showers everywhere, and while watching hundreds of thousands of folks on the OC beach from horizon to horizon and noticing that they would get up every 20 minutes or so, walk into the ocean, pee, then return to their spot on the beach. We treat the ocean like a toilet, then and now. Then, think about the amount of toilet flushes per minute. Imagine the water/sewage issues of land that is just barely above sea level.
Too many people, showing too little concern for the human effects on the environment.
I would add that trains would greatly ameliorate traffic effects and the horrific traffic emanating from the largest metro areas feeding tourists to pee in the ocean.
There are ways to develop more sustainably, not overtap groundwater, etc. It sounds like these beach communities are not doing that. It feels like every square inch of Rehoboth will be paved one day. We saw a sign for really expensive townhouses out there, but there are only one or two ways to go anywhere, always tons of traffic ... sad, it could be so much more!
Our neighborhood is an excellent example of the failure to fully consider walkability and bikeability. We have good sidewalks in our neighborhood and a shopping center within a mile. The development between us and the shopping center also has good sidewalks, but the only "safe" way between the two developments is a muddy dirt trail of 100yds or less. As for biking, there is a so-called bike lane on the road bordering our developments and shopping center, but it has narrow inside corners with overhanging brush and zero visibility for drivers at the 40MPH speed limit. The lanes also end and resume around turn lanes and major intersections, making them doubly unsafe.
This was great! I hope you get a reply.
Thanks Tyler for posting this on MR.
https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2024/09/thursday-assorted-links-469.html
The American sprawl is spectacular because it involves building new suburbia. European sprawl is subtler, it is moving to villages close to the cities, the villages do not get incorporated into the city, yet in practice they are part of it.
So there is demonstrated preference.
The result is bad behaviour. Not exactly crime, more like loud drunks throwing up on the pavement.
So the sprawl could only be stopped by making everybody behave exceedingly well, and I think that is not happening.
It would be better to take jobs out of the city and stop commuting that way.
I agree. Urbanism (TM) distracts. It’s a discourse demon. People love to argue about it, to shame fatties about driving instead of walking. But urbanism follows density; it doesn’t precede it. Once enough people live in an area, they’ll try to shut down the stroads, give up their cars & parking and invest in transit, all without prodding. If only Manhattan voted on congestion pricing, it would have already happened. And you’re right that urbanism makes allowing density seem like a weird preference, rather than idk empowering people to live where they want.
I think your metrics on walking are a bit off. Standard walking pace is about 3 miles per hour or a 20 minute mile. Seniors are slower. That generally means most services need to be with a mile (or 1.6 KM) to have a truly walkable city. Bikes extend that range, but again, seniors tend to avoid bikes (balance issues, etc.). If you start from that metric, and have zoning that allows all types of residences and business in a 1 mile radius you start to solve the car problem for living, and reduce it to work commuting and to "special services". This is basically a European city, designed for walkers, with overlays of public transport for commuting and services to higher density "centers".
Asian cities are a different result. They started with the "walk" design and they layered public transport on top. So they have more dense public transport and less highways. The highways tend to have the same failures as US highways I believe (congestion, etc.)
Over 45 years ago, I worked for a newspaper in Ocean City, MD. My co-workers and I always headed for The Back Porch restaurant/bar and other spots in Rehoboth, which was a different planet altogether from the gross exponential overdevelopment that is present today. Rehoboth was charming, quiet, and nice.
The things that truly freaked me out: the terrible quality and sulfurous smell of the tap water that stained the showers everywhere, and while watching hundreds of thousands of folks on the OC beach from horizon to horizon and noticing that they would get up every 20 minutes or so, walk into the ocean, pee, then return to their spot on the beach. We treat the ocean like a toilet, then and now. Then, think about the amount of toilet flushes per minute. Imagine the water/sewage issues of land that is just barely above sea level.
Too many people, showing too little concern for the human effects on the environment.
I would add that trains would greatly ameliorate traffic effects and the horrific traffic emanating from the largest metro areas feeding tourists to pee in the ocean.
There are ways to develop more sustainably, not overtap groundwater, etc. It sounds like these beach communities are not doing that. It feels like every square inch of Rehoboth will be paved one day. We saw a sign for really expensive townhouses out there, but there are only one or two ways to go anywhere, always tons of traffic ... sad, it could be so much more!