alt Hacker News> But then you're right back to it being regular city — exactly what the people in the suburbs (supposedly) want to avoid when they choose to live in the suburbs.
They don't have to have the density of Manhattan or SF to be better for walkability than they are now.
After all, the walkable boroughs of some of the world's biggest cities were at one point a lot like suburbs (albeit minus the car-centered planning).
Many people who move to suburbs do so because they are priced out of the affluent parts of cities, but often still want to live in a more walkable and mixed-use environment than most suburbs offer today. Suburbs can evolve to meet those preferences. It's not an easy process though, and in many places it is triggering inter-generational conflicts over zoning laws.
And yes, they could potentially meet some of these preferences in a small town like yours - many have - but small town life isn't for everyone for all kinds of reasons as we've discussed.
> They don't have to have the density of Manhattan or SF to be better for walkability than they are now.
Right, but it was said that the people don't want walkability at all. I mean, that's how we got here: Wondering why someone wants neither the walkability of the city nor the wide open spaces of the countryside, but instead the crampedness of the city and having to drive everywhere.
I mean, hey, If that's what is up someone's ally, cool. Whatever floats your boat. But the complaining about the the cost of transportation becomes at odds to that. At some point there needs to be a recognition of "you can't have it both ways", no?