[kaibee]

> I find I'd much rather drive to the mountains, or a lake, or at least a nice big park, and recreate there.

This is not a sustainable solution to population level health needs, even if maybe in your particular situation you do actually get enough vacation days and free time on weekends to be able to do this (I also doubt this).

[sershe]

Well, a more sustainable solution is everyone exercising at home whenever they want in the way they want, or going for a run around the block. Going to the store by car + going for a run, is still faster and more convenient than walking to the store (per unit of exercise - e.g. driving to the store 10 times and running 2 miles vs walking 0.2 miles to the store).

[sagarm]

In the real world, people in cities are healthier because physical activity is integrated into their daily routine.

[ehnto]

A gym is a great example of how we tend to support parts of life communally when we can live more densely.

For me the competing requirements are space for gym equipment and space for a workshop. I could have space for both if I lived further out, but then all other aspects of life would get worse. I'd have to drive constantly, to work, to social outings, to fun weekend stuff, it'd be a drag.

As you are pointing out though, we all have our tradeoffs we make. My only counterpoint would be that most cities are doing a terrible job of offering options to people who do want the more dense, "less car" communities.