Hacker News Reader

Comment by freddie_mercury | Hacker News Reader

I mean I kind of agree with your point about zoning but you realize that your chosen examples make you look like a single, childless 20something and thus somewhat out of touch with what a lot of people consider socializing?

I don't like to suburbs either but I'm currently visiting my brother who lives in one. Their socializing is kids basketball & soccer games at the park (which suburbs are zoned for), picnics at the local greenway (also zoned for), and swimming in the community pool. All of which are walking distance.

Not to mention, you know, inviting people over to their house because it isn't a tiny 400 square foot apartment. They make dinner for friends and watch football on the porch.

View on HN

Honestly, that’s sounding pretty close to just being a town.

I’ve lived in a few suburbs. One of them was blessed to have a dollar store within walking distance (you’d need to cross a busy highway, but you could walk). None of them so much as had sidewalks, though. Grocery stores were from 15-25 minutes by car. Entertainment (theaters, pools) were around that distance if not more.

Suburbs vary from place to place, just as towns and cities do. Some offer conveniences that make it hard to imagine living anywhere else. Some make it impossible to do absolutely anything without a car and a few gallons of gas.

You seem to think that social activities depend on access by walking. Suburbs are very car dependent, sure, but that doesn't mean that social activities don't happen, it just means that people drive to them.

Late 30s, father, just not "urban". The best layout I've seen was in Amsterdam - every neighborhood had it's own local pub, local coffeehouse, and small grocery, all eminently walkable/bikeable. Neighbors knew each other and socialized regularly. The "small town feel" was nailed pretty well, IMHO, while still being in a bustling urban center.

This is the case in many, if not most, major (and some not so major) European cities. I've lived in Berlin & Vienna for the past ~decade and a half & it's certainly true here (worse cycling infrastructure than Amsterdam tho).

I'll bet this is also the case for cities in developed east Asian countries like Japan, Taiwan & South Korea as well.

OK, here's a question - you say "tiny apartment", but is that really all that exists in the US? In the UK, there's a rather large amount of 2 and 3 bed flats - the one I'm living in is nearly 800 square feet, not unreasonably priced, and we can fit more people than we can reasonably organise to be available at one time.

There's also three parks within 10 minutes' walk, more a short bus ride away, and multiple shops and cafes surrounding us. And we're about 15 minutes by bus from the city centre.

Just saying... the issues the US seems to have with cities seem to mostly be a result of lack of caring about them, not inherent properties of cities.

Typical apartments in the US seem to be around 700-800 square feet, with one or two bedrooms, so not "tiny". These may or may not be located in walkable neighborhoods or with easy access to city center, it depends on the city. As an anecdote in Seattle, which is better at this than most cities, I have a one bedroom flat that is almost 1200 square feet and can walk to everything except the airport, for which there is public transit. Not unreasonably priced, though not inexpensive either. There are dozens of bars, restaurants, cafes, etc within a few blocks as well as several shops of all types.

Of course "tiny apartments" are not all that exists in the US. Many apartments are 1000 square feet or larger where I live, especially ones with more than 1 bedroom. Travis Kalanick just bought an apartment in NYC that is around 6700 square feet.

Americans also have parks, buses, shops, and cafes. All the suburbs I have lived in are about 10 minutes from a "city center".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com