Is that amount of time common to walk in places in the world where cars don’t dictate the layout of the community?
Im going to be making this walk tomorrow, no worries, I’m just curious if its normal in other places. Maps says its 1hour15minues for 2.3miles or 3.7Km.
3.7Km
It is more like 40-50 minutes if you’re in the town with actual roads, not just a corn field.
would you walk an hour and 15 minutes to go to say, the library?
Walking more than an hour just to get to one place? No, unless walking is a sub-goal. You know, the weather is nice, no tasks for today…
Would I? Depends on the day, the weather, the mood.
Would I regularly? No, I would either take public transport or the bike.
Would I need to? Also no, I live in a mid-sized city with many libraries and the closest one is 20 minutes walk away, the main one is some half an hour walk away in another direction. Access to municipal facilities was a key element in my decision of where to live.
I think that, because cars didn’t dictate the layout, things ended up being naturally closer by, such that long walks would be fairly unusual within the city.
Heck I live in a moderately sized town and the library is a 10-15 minute walk away.
I’d walk that for pleasure, but not for work. Time for you to get a bike.
Walk? No. I would cycle there. Get some bike bags so you can bring some books back.
Yes that makes sense. Good to know it’s not a common walking length for everyday. I thought I was being lazy not wanting to make the trip on foot. I’ll be two and a half hours walking for a 45 minute meeting …
I wish cars didn’t rule everything here
deleted by creator
That’s biking distance boss
As a long time (former) NYer, my maximum walk length is about 20m. Anything further than that and I’m taking public transit. The exception is when it’s a nice day out and I want to walk, in which case it’s just until I get tired
I’d bike it. 2.3 miles should only be a 45 minute walk for a normal person unless there’s bad stop lights (assume ~20 minute miles). On a bike it’s less than 15
A reasonable amount of time would be 15min-30min
Longer than that there needs to be transit
I think the most I would walk is around 40-45 minutes. So no, 1h15m would be far too long to justify walking. Maybe on the weekend if the library was super nice?
What stops to put a tram there? Or bike there? Thats then 10-20 minutes from my experience
There really could be a tram there. It’s my pike dream.
Cars rule everything here. :(
Fat Americans… Right. But they forbid walking for day to day life, make it hostile basically anywhere that isn’t a major city, and even there it kind of sucks to walk/take the bus/ride a bike.
There’s density here, Universities, my husband works at one of them, he leaves an extra 30 minutes early for work everyday, because parking is such a bitch up there they fight for spots(workers have to pay for a parking pass too!). My son can’t even ride his bike to a park or to school. I can’t tell you how much I hate it. I’m literally trapped unless I have a car. We won’t be able to move somewhere walkable that dream is dead.
I was fit when I rode my bike to work, back in the day in my states capital. My grandfather was a civil engineer who helped design this hell. I will always hate him. I don’t have the freedom of movement unless I was to dodge cars going 60mph, and be the only person on the sandy street, where people just stare at you like you’re poor from their cars.
Anyway. Ugh. I can hope for changes in the future, but that is becoming very bleak each day.
I knowww right? Im not from america but when ever i see that something around the corner is a 160 minutes walk is CRAZY! Even here in german country side you have to rely on cars to even get anywhere outside the villages!! One should have the right, to get to anywhere with public transport and not be reliant on private tools!
I dont get the whole “cars give you freedom” argument.
How are you indipendent if you are trapped in a metal cage you cant move around in? Dependend on so many companies, mechanics, oil, licensing, insurance and all that you pay yourself!!
I once met one that tried to argue car dependence is good because since you force people to spend their money on all that is good for the economy. I am NOT KIDDING!
The “cars give you freedom” argument also completely breaks apart if you stop to think about the millions of people who can’t drive, such as children and blind people, who are forced to rely on someone else taking them everywhere because they can’t walk without getting run over and public transport is nonexistent.
It’s only “freedom” if you can afford it.
Yes! It is a right!
It SHOULD BE a right! IN LAW just like food, water, housing!!
No, that’s way too far just for the library. I’d do that for pleasure but right now I’m time poor and can’t afford that for a general task.
If I had no responsibilities for the day I would walk that but if I had anything else it would add up too much
no, but i would bike 10 minutes
Walkable means all you need is in reasonable walking distance.
I wouldn’t consider my neighbourhood to be particularly walkable as it’s a suburb (in Europe) but my library is about 15 mins walk away.
Sometimes the amenity you need isn’t in that walkable range, but cycling is a great alternative.
A walkable environment also means good public transport.
Where I live there are neither. The roads are not walkable, and there is no public transport. I would be happy if they were walkable. I’ll never see buses here as long as I live. They are separate things.
I live somewhere that absolutely should be walkable and it isn’t. No local public transport, not a single bike lane.
It’s really frustrating. Last time I tried to walk to the store, a 15 minute walk, not counting waiting for the crosswalk light at the 5 lane, four way intersection, my son and I almost got hit by a car when we had the walk signal. It is smelly, loud, dirty, and outright hostile to pedestrians. It’s even dangerous for the cars, that intersection is a race track, and there are accidents there all the time. That’s what I must cross to make my way, two miles, to downtown. I really want walkability.
Anyway, meeting I had to walk for, was able to make it virtual.
I don’t want to live like this. It’s not human.
I asked here, because I thought I was being lazy not wanting to make this journey. I’m glad to confirm, I’m not, and it is not common to walk this length.
That’s weird reasoning. Why would walkable mean there’s busses?
For me walkable means that you don’t need to own a vehicle from going from point A to B and pedestrians are not an afterthought.
For my daily commute or to meet my friends it’s faster/comfortable to walk to the metro station or bus stop than picking the car.
For me walkable means that you don’t need to own a vehicle from going from point A to B and pedestrians are not an afterthought.
“Walkable” is a very bad description of your vision in that case. :) Anti-car would be more correct, no?
I know a lot of ways to shape an environment so that you do not need a vehicle, yet it’s not walkable neither.
