←back to thread

437 points Vinnl | 4 comments | | HN request time: 1.775s | source
Show context
philipallstar ◴[] No.43985073[source]
The increased speeds are excellent for those who can afford the toll. This is a universal benefit of toll roads for those people.
replies(11): >>43985179 #>>43985221 #>>43985275 #>>43985330 #>>43985416 #>>43985492 #>>43985546 #>>43990037 #>>43990827 #>>43991040 #>>43994900 #
bryanlarsen ◴[] No.43985179[source]
And the investments in public transit and bike paths are excellent for those who can't. Such unalloyed win-wins are hard to find.
replies(4): >>43985193 #>>43985280 #>>43992158 #>>43993536 #
lokar ◴[] No.43985193[source]
I lived in Manhattan, and was very well paid. I did not own a car, and loved it. This would have been great for me as well.
replies(1): >>43989879 #
timewizard ◴[] No.43989879[source]
Did you have children or did you live alone?
replies(7): >>43989923 #>>43990006 #>>43990154 #>>43990171 #>>43990543 #>>43991841 #>>43994594 #
epistasis ◴[] No.43989923[source]
As someone with children, I can not imagine the bliss of living in Manhattan and being able to do things without needing a car.

Car-centric urban planning is hell with kids. You have to load them up into the car for any small trip. You can't walk or bike anywhere because cars make it so dangerous.

My only regret about living in the US is this car hellscape that is so hard to avoid. It's mandated by law, not chosen by the market.

replies(11): >>43990148 #>>43990307 #>>43990698 #>>43991140 #>>43991245 #>>43992028 #>>43992079 #>>43992259 #>>43993909 #>>43995624 #>>43998539 #
seanmcdirmid ◴[] No.43990307[source]
You can live in an urban neighborhood and only use your car a few times a week (mostly on weekends and for yearly kid doctor visits). Its not just Manhattan, Seattle supports this as well (well, you still "need" a car, but you can get away with not driving it very often). You need to be strategic about where you live (e.g. buying the house 7 minutes away from your kid's K-8 and 10 minutes away from his future 9-12, with grocery stores and dentists nearby).
replies(3): >>43990790 #>>43990799 #>>43990807 #
1. gertlex ◴[] No.43990799[source]
> You need to be strategic about where you live (e.g. buying the house ...

I wonder what % (presumably low) of the population can live in SFHs and achieve this cities like Seattle.

I should try finding if there's available work that's made visualizations of this sort of things ("How many homes could be within X miles or minutes of A B and C" for SFH, Quadplex, 5-over-1s etc.)

replies(2): >>43991072 #>>43991893 #
2. seanmcdirmid ◴[] No.43991072[source]
You aren’t exactly going to find an SFH in the suburbs that is much cheaper. So you have a point, but you have to choose between an SFH, a similar priced townhome (basically an SFH without a yard), or a condo with an HOA, all basically unaffordable unless you want to commute from Kent or Marysville. Seattle still has density (the townhome I live in in Ballard is one of three that used to be one SFH).
replies(1): >>44001752 #
3. divbzero ◴[] No.43991893[source]
Walk Score can provide an estimate of walkability for any given address.

https://www.walkscore.com/

4. gertlex ◴[] No.44001752[source]
Indeed. My intended purpose of such a tool would be to crudely illustrate the impracticality of everyone aspiring to such housing ;)