| > To be honest this is one of those Internet comments where I feel like the commenter is in a different reality than me. Same, but that's why I say the US is a big place. There isn't a standard US suburb. > They definitely don't walk to the grocery store, to a restaurant, to a bar, to the gym, to work, etc. That is alien to my experience. I can walk to all of those, with multiple instances of each one, from a suburban SFH. On the first link near Charlotte, I have two comments: First one is that it stretches the definition of suburb. Switch to satellite view and zoom out until you see Charlotte. Those houses are in the midst of vast stretches of green, far away from the nearest urban area (Charlotte) a half hour away. That seems semi-rural to me. Are we calling that a suburb? Even so, there is a supermarket, gym, tavern and a few other stores within 1 mile. A very easy bike ride. The second link is definitely suburban, smack in the middle of built-up areas. Also more familiar to me since I have lived in various spots not far from there. You can easily walk to Saratoga Ave which is full of businesses. |
In your view then... what in the world is this about? If suburbs are perfectly walkable, why does anyone care about urbanism? Why does this channel https://www.youtube.com/c/notjustbikes have over a million subscribers?
Moreover, why is the suburb such a post-automobile phenomenon? If it's viable to get everywhere from a suburb without a car, why were people in 1000 BCE or 1000 CE or 1800 CE not living in suburbs?
I just find this perspective so weird... I've definitely met plenty of people who are very pro-suburb, but it's because they consider it natural and acceptable to need a car for any trip, not because they think they can get places without a car.