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.
That’s too much for walking. I would take a bike in that case.
Here’s what I consider common:
- Walk 10 minutes to the train station
- Get to the city center while scrolling Lemmy on your phone.
- Walk in the center to visit some fancy stores. Maybe like 15-20 minutes in one direction.
- Buy some specialty coffee, fancy kitchen knives, Bialetti rubber rings or whatever.
- Walk back to the station: 15-20 minutes.
- Battery is nearly dead, and I forgot to bring a charger with me. I guess I’ll just stare out the window.
- Walk back home: 10 min.
In total, that’s going to be like an hour, but it’s divided into multiple parts. Walking that much in just one direction is something I would prefer to avoid. If the library is a 60 min walk away, that’s the same as like 12 bus stops or 15 minutes while sitting in a bus. BTW that 15 minutes includes walking at both ends of the journey. I would definitely choose public transport over walking in that case.
If the destination is just 15 minutes walk away from your house, that’s perfectly normal, and not a problem in any way. If it’s like 20 minutes away, I would begin to consider using a bike or maybe even a bus.
I’m in pretty much the same boat as you
0-20 minutes is usually walking or up to about 1mi/1.6km After that I usually consider biking up to around 5mi/8km If biking isn’t good due to terrain/parking/activity or any further I would generally rather take some form of public transit
Alas I live in the U.S. in a non pedestrian friendly area now and the majority of the time the only real option is driving
I’ve spent some time in a few different environments in Europe. In the city, the walking rule applies, and public transport works well. You don’t really need a car unless you buy ikea furniture frequently. The larger the city, the more you end up hating your car.
In small towns, the focus shifts towards walking, bicycling and driving your own car. Busses might exist, but just barely. Not something you would consider unless you’re completely out of options. If you live close to the town center, you can walk or bike nearly everywhere, but you usually still need a car for certain things. That’s not really a problem because parking is free and always available everywhere.
If you’re in a more rural environment, walking is no longer an option, because everything is at least 5 km (about an hour walk) away, usually more like 20-50 km away. Bicycling is an option, but there are no bike lanes. That’s usually not a huge problem since there’s hardly any traffic to bother you. The locals seem to enjoy F1 and rally though, so bare that in mind. Oh, and the wildlife is actively looking for ways to commit suicide using your car, so keep your eyes open while driving.
So, how is it on the other side of the puddle? I’ve heard all sorts of wild things, and I get the feeling that it’s really different from what I’ve experienced here.
I lived in a town of around 5k that was all within 9 km2 and there it was great because you could walk/bike everywhere and there was a regular bus that took you to the next town over that was even smaller that was also walkable, really the only time you needed a car was going to do outdoor sports or if you needed to get any further than the other town because the next closest town was around 120km away
I also lived in a city of around 160k that was considered one of the most bikeable cities in the country and you could bike to the stores but even then you would end up having to bike around cars on roads going 75km/hr which isn’t super fun and there were busses but they generally didnt run frequently enough to rely on so even things like going to the gym or the grocery store usually involved a car
I grew up in the suburban hell which represents large chunks of America where it was around 5-10km to any store and your only real option was driving
Where I currently live there are busses but they don’t really run frequently to rely on and while the downtown area is decently walkable there aren’t any good sidewalks or bike lanes to get there so most people drive to the downtown. But there aren’t really any grocery stores in the down town area all the shops are more niche shops or bars/reastaurants so you still basically have to own a car
So of all those the first one was the only one you could comfortably live without a car
Thanks for the reply. That really clarifies a few things. No wonder why they call it a suburban hell.
Anyway about the shopping thing. In walkable places, the largest shopping centers tend to be close metro/train/bus stations, so you can easily do your shopping on the way home. I guess that’s not the case in America, now is it?
We have a lot of absolutely massive stores, as in around 4000 m^2 and then they have parking lots that are generally even larger so a single grocery store can take up 10,000 m^2 and then they are usually in the same lot as massive sporting goods or clothes stores of comparable sizes. So you end up with these giant clumps of stores but with the only way of getting there is to drive or walk along a highway
A walkable environment also means good public transport.
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.
A walkable city has libraries in every alternate neighborhood. So one is generally at most 1~1.5km away. But anything more than ~800m, I’m taking the bus anyway.
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.
I wouldn’t walk any distance for a library.
But even it was a place I actually wanted to go, 10 minutes walking distance is about the maximum. For anything more there has to be a tram (or at least a bus).
By the way, count the actual time it took you to walk that. From personal experience, Google Maps always says a considerably higher number
Agreed. 90 minutes to go 2.3 miles sounds like a snails pace. That works out to just under 40 minutes to walk a mile. Most healthy adults should be able to jog or fast walk a mile in under 15 minutes. A 5k is about 3.1 miles and most of the slow runners finish in 30-40 minutes. I would consider 25 minutes per mile a leisurely pace. 40 minutes per mile must mean a lot of signalized intersections. I’ve found a mile or two is the perfect distance to walk home from the bar after a night out (weather dependent obviously). Maybe Google thinks they’ll be walking drunk?
Thats fair. Honestly its less about the time, and more about how hostile the first half the journey is. I used to live in a place that was urban, I felt lazy not wanting to make this trip, just another “stupid lazy American” ya know. Confirmed here it’s not normal to walk an hour to a destination as an everyday task, even though I have done walks prior daily, I’m not so young anymore.
Everyone has their own definition of “walkable”. For me that’s not, plus it’s getting to the point where the books i’d likely get would be annoying to carry. But also do you mean literally walkable or “don’t need a car”. The latter includes transit and micromobility
I walk to my library but it’s less than ten minutes. Especially since they put up parking meters, walking ten minutes is more convenient than finding change or feeding a profiteering app company.
Unfortunately the best part of my towns downtown is a mile away so less convenient. Most of the time I’ve lived here I’ve decided to drive the mile but since pandemic I’ve been far more likely to walk. I recently went to a diner where a newly opened trail made it a nice walk despite it being over a mile.
And the definition of walkable changes over time as well. As a young adult I lived in Boston and considered essentially everything walkable. While I was also a big user of transit, they tended to be too slow and crowded when you can walk instead. Most of my driving was to move my car for street cleaning or snow removal
I used to live about that distance from my work. I only walked it occasionally, if the weather was nice, I had the time to spare, and a little extra energy. Generally I took the bus.
I think 30 minutes is about how long I’d walk to get somewhere before considering public transit or driving.
I don’t do walks longer than 20 minutes unless it’s for pleasure, thankfully the bus can get me most places I want to go beyond that. The terrain also makes a difference, I’d be less inclined to do 20 minutes uphill or across multiple freeways or something.
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
Not really.
I may do a walk like that if I incorporate the walk as a leisure. But if I have to just be in a place I won’t be walking more than 30-40 minutes to get to it if there’s a fastest more convenient way.
We do that few times a year but bike is designed for these distances
If it’s more than a 20 minute walk I’m biking, if it’s more than a 30 minute bike ride I’m driving, if it’s more than a 40 minute drive I’m not going.
I walk 1,5 km in 10-15 minutes (depends on if I am alone or not), so yes I would walk that. But I like walking, I can suggest walking as a way to hang out haha
Depends on the weather but probably not. I would walk an hour to a concert, to keep from having to park the car, but library, no. 2 miles doesn’t seem like it should take that long though - 2 miles is the distance kids have to have between their house and the school before the school bus will get them, so I had to walk that twice a day for 7 years of my youth, it didn’t take an hour.
