Hacker News Reader

> The bicycle is a great way to exceed "walking distance", but why should that even be necessary in day-to-day life?

Uh... because I want to visit friends? Go see a show? Explore? Take a job that's not immediately next door? There are a million reasons why.

You know what cities were insanely walkable? The endless concrete enclaves of Khrushchyovkas in the USSR. Walkable does not mean pleasant.

Biking isn't just a means of transportation, it's also a means of recreation - on weekends I bike to get outside the city, tree lined country roads make for a nice relaxing ride.

Key word: "necessary"

In a walkable environment you can still make longer trips using other modes.

I can't speak to the cities of the USSR, but your "counter-example" is meaningless regardless.

More people can walk than can/will ride a bike. Many old people avoid biking due to poor balance and strength, but can walk without issue.

Biking allows you to move without moving your full body weight across your for and ankle. Bicycles are great for people with lower body joint issues.

Three wheelers work great for people with balance issues.

Tokyo is a testament to the power of bicycles to increase mobility for all ages. I agree with you, but I also recognize that bikes can be better for many people than walking, plus they extend the practical range significantly.

Tokyo is a good example of a city that is very walkable, but it is also very bikeable, and has top-tier transit, and you can even own a car. The same cannot be said for places that are planned to exclude walking simply based on the distance between destinations.

Not to mention if your city works well for bikes it tends to also work well for mobility scooters and wheelchairs.

What do you consider walkable range? I bike five miles to work. But I find walking more than about a quarter mile with two day's groceries to be very unpleasant in the heat.

Maybe taking a backpack would do the trick. But loading up my bike, or my bike plus a trailer, is far more pleasant for all but the shortest distances.

Maybe I've just not experienced it yet, but it's hard to fathom every hardware store, grocery store, bar, restaurant, workplace, school, city rec center, post office, etc that I would ever really want to visit could reasonably fit into a quarter mile square.

I agree with you, but it's significantly harder to design a city where everything you need, including jobs for you and your spouse is within a kilometer or two. Bicycles increase effective range by a factor six or so. Paired with good public transport you can reach any point in a normal city within forty minutes.

Expecting most people to work within walking distance doesn't seem realistic except for those with minimally specialized skills. I mean if you are lucky, sure, and it is easier if you stick with the same employer for your entire career.

Unless you are talking telecommuting or the like.

I live 12 miles from work. I live closer to work than 75% of my colleagues. Some live 30+ miles away.

The bars and hangouts my friends visit are all over town. And for the things nearby: Would I rather spend an hour walking 5 miles to a park or restaurant, or 12 minutes with good bike lanes?

In the south, you don't want to stay out long unless you're ready to sweat. 10 minutes at a casual biking pace is several miles, 10 minutes walking is a mile, maybe, and with less wind for the energy expended.

I hazard a guess that you're from a northern coastal area, or Europe.

>I live 12 miles from work. I live closer to work than 75% of my colleagues. Some live 30+ miles away.

That arrangement precludes walking as a practical form of transportation. Build things closer together. Your typical destination could be 12 minutes away on foot, not an hour. When you want to travel to something that is an hour's walk away, you can bike instead. Bikes work fine in places that are walking-scale. Walking doesn't work in places that are biking-scale.

Not sure what else to say about the temperature. The design of a place can be altered to make it more bearable, like having plentiful street trees and awnings for shade. In the end, some people cannot bring themselves to exist outside of artificial cooling and heating. It's largely a cultural thing. People walk in other very hot places, and in other very cold places. Dress for the weather, endure some discomfort, and take some judgement from the weaker people.

That says low density than anything else.

At 25k people per km^2 you get 200 thousand people within 1 mile radius and 0.8 million people within 2 mile walking distance. That transforms most US population centers into tiny little walk-able islands.

Public transit can spread things out, but lower density is a real trade-off.