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.
That distinction describes being auto dependent... not auto centric.
hth
I guess we think of different things from those terms. Auto centric to means the normal mode of transportation is centered around the automobile. So since you mentioned that almost no one in your neighborhood actually walks for transportation or to the local stores, it's auto-centric.
Auto centric to means the normal mode of transportation is centered around the automobile.
So since you mentioned that (few) in your neighborhood actually (CHOOSES to) walk for transportation or to the local stores, it's auto-centric.
Yes; where I am is auto-centric. Most choose to drive almost all of the time.
The example you gave is one where there really is no choice but to drive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
My point was that I don't consider auto-centric environments where it would be impractical to be carless to be walkable.
When there is no choice but to drive, or no practical choice to walk...
then another hurdle is crossed into dependency on the car.
If I wanted to live like rats piled on top of each other, I would move to NYC or any one of the other inner city offerings... YUK!
I much prefer the uncrowded suburbs to any city. So what if it is 2-3 miles to any of the shops or restaurants? I like the privacy of my car and my neighborhood.
What about those people who aren't choosing between city & suburb but instead are choosing between different types of suburbs? Without condemning people for their preferences, it would be interesting to understand why people make the choices they do.
Here are my best guesses as to why some people prefer those neighborhoods that are sometimes called "unwalkable." I'm talking about the ones without sidewalks and where you have to drive to go to a store. I'd love to hear feedback from those who have made these choices to see if my guesses are even close.
1. The neighborhood and/or the house appeals for other reasons and that's what matters to the homeowner. Whether or not there are sidewalks is not a big deal--he doesn't plan to walk anywhere, so it doesn't matter.
2. The neighborhoods that are relatively unwalkable are also the best priced. Developers can charge less because they don't include sidewalks--and the homeowner doesn't care anyway because he drives everywhere anyway.
3. As noted in an earlier post, the "unwalkable" neighborhoods appeal to people who value privacy. They also tend to be quieter and more serene. Some people like being a fair distance from stores because shopping plazas are sometimes noisy and they don't want to deal with the people who sometimes hang out at stores.
4. They like the look of yards stretching all the way out to the street. Or maybe they don't want a sidewalk because then they'd have to shovel it every winter?
What about those people who aren't choosing between city & suburb but instead are choosing between different types of suburbs? Without condemning people for their preferences, it would be interesting to understand why people make the choices they do.
Here are my best guesses as to why some people prefer those neighborhoods that are sometimes called "unwalkable." I'm talking about the ones without sidewalks and where you have to drive to go to a store. I'd love to hear feedback from those who have made these choices to see if my guesses are even close.
1. The neighborhood and/or the house appeals for other reasons and that's what matters to the homeowner. Whether or not there are sidewalks is not a big deal--he doesn't plan to walk anywhere, so it doesn't matter.
2. The neighborhoods that are relatively unwalkable are also the best priced. Developers can charge less because they don't include sidewalks--and the homeowner doesn't care anyway because he drives everywhere anyway.
3. As noted in an earlier post, the "unwalkable" neighborhoods appeal to people who value privacy. They also tend to be quieter and more serene. Some people like being a fair distance from stores because shopping plazas are sometimes noisy and they don't want to deal with the people who sometimes hang out at stores.
4. They like the look of yards stretching all the way out to the street. Or maybe they don't want a sidewalk because then they'd have to shovel it every winter?
The reason I didn't ask about walkable suburbs because I was trying to defend the people who choose to live in "unwalkable" suburbs. For some reason, there are people who don't understand or accept why somebody would live in an enviroment that is condsidered unwalkable.
What about those people who aren't choosing between city & suburb but instead are choosing between different types of suburbs? Without condemning people for their preferences, it would be interesting to understand why people make the choices they do.
Here are my best guesses as to why some people prefer those neighborhoods that are sometimes called "unwalkable." I'm talking about the ones without sidewalks and where you have to drive to go to a store. I'd love to hear feedback from those who have made these choices to see if my guesses are even close.
1. The neighborhood and/or the house appeals for other reasons and that's what matters to the homeowner. Whether or not there are sidewalks is not a big deal--he doesn't plan to walk anywhere, so it doesn't matter.
2. The neighborhoods that are relatively unwalkable are also the best priced. Developers can charge less because they don't include sidewalks--and the homeowner doesn't care anyway because he drives everywhere anyway.
3. As noted in an earlier post, the "unwalkable" neighborhoods appeal to people who value privacy. They also tend to be quieter and more serene. Some people like being a fair distance from stores because shopping plazas are sometimes noisy and they don't want to deal with the people who sometimes hang out at stores.
4. They like the look of yards stretching all the way out to the street. Or maybe they don't want a sidewalk because then they'd have to shovel it every winter?
My parents wouldn't object to living in a walkable neighborhood; my mother would definitely enjoy being able to walk to a nice town center and shops and my father would care less. I doubt they would mind sidewalks, either.
Years ago, when they realized they could afford a more expensive and larger home they considered two choices in our town at about the same price: a mostly walkable neighborhood near a popular suburban center but with relatively small lots and an unwalkable neighborhood that was hopefully (though many times not, as it turned out) quiet and on large lots — 1 acre. They chose the second because they cared more in large lots than walkability.
My guess is that many suburbanites wouldn't mind walkablility, it's just not high on their list of priorities. Though, maybe some are so used to driving everywhere they haven't thought to consider it (or their isn't a pleasant option in the region).
I'd love to hear feedback from those who have made these choices to see if my guesses are even close.
My choice is auto centric and while walkable... it isn't "villagey" walkable (now).
There's talk of redeveloping the nearby service and shopping area, little more than a mediocre old countryside crossroads, but until then it's appeal is limited to the functional not the aesthetic.
If/when that happens I'll probably bicycle there more regularly but still not walk it often.
Quote:
1. The neighborhood and/or the house appeals for other reasons and that's what matters to the homeowner. Whether or not there are sidewalks is not a big deal--he doesn't plan to walk anywhere, so it doesn't matter.
Large lot, detached garage, secluded site but still only 3-5 road miles from the level one trauma center, the artsy district, the interstate, YMCA, museums, library. But walking on the neighborhood roads itself isn't an issue.
Plenty do it for exercising or dog walking etc and of course the kids who don't have cars.
2. The neighborhoods that are relatively unwalkable are also the best priced. Developers can charge less because they don't include sidewalks--and the homeowner doesn't care anyway because he drives everywhere anyway.
Not un-walkable in the least... as said, with low traffic there's no need for sidewalks to protect pedestrians from anything. This circa 1940-60 development on the outskirts of the city has solidly built houses on medium to large lots with nice old builder features and amenities at some very appealing prices. There are just very few adults who don't have somewhere else to go when they leave the house and that still needs the car
3. As noted in an earlier post, the "unwalkable" neighborhoods appeal to people who value privacy. They also tend to be quieter and more serene. Some people like being a fair distance from stores because shopping plazas are sometimes noisy and they don't want to deal with the people who sometimes hang out at stores.
A 1/2 mile hike to the service garage to fetch the car if it broke down, or get it filled up or washed or pick up a jug of milk, or beer, or liquor, or drop off the dry cleaning, or have lunch at the cafe and then tough out a 1/2 mile hike home... or get back in the car after and continue on with the rest of the days activities.
It works just fine for me (though I don't do the hike very often).
I do wish they would get the pedestrian tunnel under the commuter arterial road done soon though...
I'll probably bicycle more places when that is done.
4. They like the look of yards stretching all the way out to the street.
Or maybe they don't want a sidewalk because then they'd have to shovel it every winter?
Instead of sidewalks I get two driveways to shovel. (well, if we ever got that much snow here)
And yeah, 3/4ac of lawn and lots of mature trees are pleasant to be around
not to mention the garden space and the trail into the woods.
Is that what you had in mind?
Last edited by MrRational; 12-25-2011 at 08:11 PM..
Yes; where I am is auto-centric. Most choose to drive almost all of the time.
The example you gave is one where there really is no choice but to drive.
When there is no choice but to drive, or no practical choice to walk...
then another hurdle is crossed into dependency on the car.
hth
I understand what you're saying, but I took it if most choose to drive almost all the time then that not driving (as in regularly not just once in a while) would be rather inconvenient and impractical and it's so auto-dependent as well auto-centric. But I don't know your neighborhood. And obviously there are different degrees of walkability and auto-centric / auto-dependency.
I understand what you're saying, but I took it if most choose to drive almost all the time then that not driving (as in regularly not just once in a while) would be rather inconvenient and impractical and it's so auto-dependent as well auto-centric.
That may be too subjective to be meaningful. ---
Working up from the basics:
Walkable means that people can do so without risk.
In town that usually means sidewalks and such but farther out with less traffic sidewalks aren't needed.
But walkable also implies that there is something to walk TO.
Retail and services of some sort... however modest.
But that then raises the real point of how the term gets used... the subtext:
whether that retail and service destinations are declasse or arriviste.
My sense is that if the shops aren't offering artisan bread, over-roasted coffee,
kitschy knick-knacks and such that they don't count to those who would use these terms.
---
As to being auto-centric, in my experience this has for more to with how people think they use their car...
and perhaps whether a family might be able to manage with only one car; using transit more.
The desire or need to go to other places in addition to the shops and services close enough to walk to happens just as much in the more densely populated areas with sidewalks... which aren't any closer to the other shops and services people need to use let alone the malls, big box stores, or their work place.
Last edited by MrRational; 12-25-2011 at 09:18 PM..
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.
(well, if we ever got that much snow here)
