Walking somewhere (safely) shouldn't be a bougie privilege

Depressing that this is how walkability, I think, is sometimes broadly viewed now, but it's not without reason

Earlier this week I was in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for a work thing. It was very cool to be there. Chapel Hill is the kind of place I would probably never had reason to visit, if it weren’t for these crazy blessings that have happened to me recently in my career.

Anyway, I spent some time strolling around the campus, which was very beautiful. It reminded me a little bit of Harvard, and I think it is around the same age. It was more spread out of course.

UNC Chapel Hill is the kind of school my smartest friends in high school aspired to go to, and couldn’t get into.

I got to hang out with and meet people from all over the state, at the convening I was there for. This area is part of the “research triangle” and is a growing, higher-income region full of well-educated people. So sorta the opposite of Cleveland, hate to say.

It was interesting to hear what the local problems were. By comparison to Cleveland, they seemed pretty trivial, to be honest.

HOWEVER, the issue of housing prices is a very big deal there. Even some people who work at the university in professional roles struggle to become homeowners now. A lot of the surrounding areas were pretty walkable, and because so much of the city is centered around the campus, it’s got a relatively high number of people who walk and bike and take transit to work. In fact, their transit has been free for a while. And so in that way, it was aspirational.

At the same time, all the lower-income people in the region, and even a lot of the students, have been forced to move pretty far away, I was told. This is sort of the opposite of Cleveland a little bit, where the city is still depressed compared to wealthier suburbs.

But this dynamic though is common in a lot of the country. My sister lives in Florida. And in Florida, a lot of times, the walkable parts are few and far between but where they are is mostly by the beach, and only really wealthy people can afford to live by the beach for the most part. And she and her husband do pretty well but still can’t afford that. It upsets and offends her when people make mocking comments about the suburbs.

This is not quite the way things work in Cleveland, like I mentioned, but this dynamic still impacts the way people view these discussions around walkability very profoundly. Walkability, to some people, might be synonymous with fancy cheese shops and third wave coffee. And as much as we want to separate them, we haven’t done a good job, over the last decade, of producing real world examples that don’t conform to this stereotype.

I *think,* charitably speaking, this might explain the kind-of unhinged response to “15 Minute Cities.” I have to admit, that this bewildered me as well — both the excitement about it and the backlash to it, honestly. Placing destinations closer together is not a new idea. It’s more of a sort of branding campaign for this concept that’s been around for a while.

Anyway, why do people lose their minds about this? Again, I don’t fill understand it, and it’s been the target of a weird propaganda campaign, and as I keep mentioning, people are sort of not in their right minds right now also. But, hear me out, MAYBE in the average American’s head, the only neighborhoods they can think of that are walkable are either #1. Poor/maybe dangerous/whatever negative stereotypes are associated with that #2. Really, really bougie and culturally quite a bit different than the average suburb. And if they don’t identify with either culture that much, maybe they have a strong reaction to the idea that that should be the norm.

In the “urbanist” sphere, there’s a lot of emphasis, at least rhetorically, around improving mobility for lower income people. And this is important for obvious reasons.

But I also think there should be more emphasis on the middle class, and especially the lower middle class. The AVERAGE person, ought to be able to walk somewhere, whether it’s a little practical trip now and then or just for recreation/exercise. And if they cannot, it will be hard for them to maintain their health.

I saw this instagram story recently, and a woman was complaining about our lifestyles in the U.S. compared to Italy. And she mentioned the quality of our food (garbage, obviously) and also that we can’t walk anywhere and so we have to go to Orange Theory etc. and spend money, when moderate exercise should be part of our everyday routines.

Only so many people have the financial and personal resources to devote to Orange Theory like places to keep themselves fit. But the sad truth is, most places in the U.S. aren’t all that safe for riding a bike or walking.

I think if we had more models of places that had invested in walkability and thought of it as a core value, but weren’t so wealthy, it would be very helpful to this discussion.