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.
For the suburbanites who live in auto-centric suburbs, why do you live there? Why do you not live in a suburb where it is more walkable?
Just so you know, I'm a defender of auto-centric suburbs, even though I live in the city. On other threads, I keep trying to tell people that auto-centric suburbs are beneficial for people who chose to live in the suburbs.
We used to live in a somewhat walkable suburb. Now we live in a rural location. The reason we moved was the desire to build a passive solar home that I designed.
That being said there are definitely pros and cons of living in a more rural location. My wife and I are more dependent on our car now and the energy we are saving in home heating costs is offset by greater expenses and time for travel. We now plan our trips a lot more than the past. It is definitely very peaceful and beautiful.
However, when our children graduate from high school we will most likely move back to a 1st-tier suburb where we are closer to everyday needs and conveniences.
For the suburbanites who live in auto-centric suburbs, why do you live there?
Why do you not live in a suburb where it is more walkable?
Being "auto-centric" doesn't have to mean being "unwalkable".
I'm a 1/2 mile down a little traveled lane (with no sidewalks) from a pretty busy road
at the end of which there are a variety of services and modest shopping available.
But aside from things like walking the dog very few adults at this end of the lane
(including myself) will walk our little traveled lane to get to those places.
I like the quiet and seclusion of my acre lot at the end of this little traveled lane.
As the crow flies though... I'm still less about 3 miles from just about everything.
Being "auto-centric" doesn't have to mean being "unwalkable".
I'm a 1/2 mile down a little traveled lane (with no sidewalks) from a pretty busy road
at the end of which there are a variety of services and modest shopping available.
But aside from things like walking the dog very few adults at this end of the lane
(including myself) will walk our little traveled lane to get to those places.
I like the quiet and seclusion of my acre lot at the end of this little traveled lane.
As the crow flies though... I'm still less about 3 miles from just about everything.
hth
I agree with you, but if you listen to urbanist, they seem to believe auto-centric suburbs aren't walkable.
Try being without a car for a while in one of them.
There are pro's and cons to living in any enviroment. It would be difficult to be in an auto centric suburb without. There are con's to living in an urban enviroment.
The community I live in is mostly walkable suburb. We have the whole palette of walkable features--sidewalks, tunnels under the main roads, stores/churches/community centers within a few blocks, etc. I'm a walker, so that's important to me. However, we do have one really small neighborhood that's dramatically different from the rest of us. It's not walkable at all, and even though it's not where I would choose to live it does have its fans.
Here's a photo of it.
So why would people choose this neighborhood over the more walkable neighborhood I live in? I would imagine people who choose this sort of community don't like to walk (beyond a stroll around the immediate neighborhood), and prefer more privacy. In this neighborhood I think people like feeling they are out in the country even though they're not (you can actually see a sliver of the back of my neighbor's house in the first picture. We're that close.) So even though I wouldn't choose to live up here I know a few people who do and they like it because it's private. They aren't the type of people who would ever want to run down to the store, they prefer the feeling of being "away from it all." Some of the people who live here are professional athletes and other minor local celebrities, so it attracts the type of people who want to be able to walk their dog or rake their leaves without being bothered by looky loos walking by. Also, as you can see, you can keep horses in this neighborhood (you can't in mine).
Try being without a car for a while in one of them.
Anyway... I'm sure some locations are more remote than mine but unless the comparison is a home immediately next door to everything one might need... some walking to the shops, some walking between the shops and very likely some walking to the bus stop that takes you to other shops or work is a common denominator everyone will have; even those who drove to get to that shopping area to begin with.
The question, as I see it, is how long the initial walk to some shops or at least the bus stop is.
Or more specifically, if comparing X to Y, the incremental difference in distance from home to that first stop.
As I'm at the end of the lane 95% of those around me have ever shorter distances to walk to get to that shop and service area than I do.
There are pro's and cons to living in any enviroment. It would be difficult to be in an auto centric suburb without. There are con's to living in an urban enviroment.
I agree with that.
My point was that I don't consider auto-centric environments where it would be impractical to be carless to be walkable.
My point was that I don't consider auto-centric environments where it would be impractical to be carless to be walkable.
That distinction describes being auto dependent... not auto centric.
hth
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.