Columbus troubling lack of sidewalks, poor walkability

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

believe it or not! i don’t think i have seen a city get so suburban so quickly as columbus does. You’d think all the growth and money in the area i keep hearing about would lead to infrastructure improvements, but you really can’t tell that at all. other cities have clearly invested back into themselves as a result of population boom, seattle comes to mind. but columbus really doesn’t feel like anything is happening here.

Seattle is a fantastic example in this context.

Believe it or not, their attitudes toward infrastructure were similar to Columbus up until pretty recently.

After reversing their population loss in the 1990's, they slowly got serious about infrastructure and are now on track to have one of the largest intraurban rail systems in the nation

It's true, one might think that a city that constantly hypes its massive population growth would have some sort of plan for things like sidewalks, but as they say, Rome wasn't built in a day!

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

How much would it cost to finish Columbus sidewalks? You could buy an MLB team for less

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/...mbus-nletter65

This is the thing that bothers me most about Columbus tbh. I can never take people seriously who talk about Columbus as if it's some amazing urban oasis city in Ohio. Anything but - how can you go around town and not notice the glaring lack of even the most basic urban amenity, namely the sidewalk??? I really think people who say this don't venture outside of the small central area.

How bad is it? Bad. 60% of the city has no sidewalk. People complain about the bad transportation here (also true) but honestly we need to start small and make walking possible, it's not that big an ask.

All your posts are always about building these dumb straw men to tear down. Who actually claims Columbus is an "urban oasis"? It's built much like 99% of American cities are- with an urban core surrounded by sprawl. That's true of every Ohio city and almost every city in the country. There are like maybe half a dozen truly urban cities in the entire nation, and none of them are in Ohio.

As for the lack of sidewalks, almost all the neighborhoods that lack them were built between 1950-1980, when priorities and policies were different than they are now. The city has been trying to fill in the gaps in the sidewalk network over time, if not somewhat too slowly. I don't think it's so much a cost issue as a labor issue, though.

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

Somehow Cleveland, Akron, Canton, Youngstown, Toledo, Cincinnati etc don't have this problem.

Look I know it's your whole shtick to do this, but please cut it out. There is no excuse for a state capital to not have sidewalks. Enough.

This is more than a little disengenuous. If we compared the core 80 square miles of the 3-Cs, I would wager that the amount of area that has sidewalks is very similar, and that all the areas without them would exist in later mid-century neighborhoods that Columbus includes more of within its boundaries that the others don't.

And since the article is behind a paywall, perhaps you could share whether the article talked about whether that figure has been decreasing over time.

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by tribecavsbrowns

I thought the "you could buy an MLB team for less" and "it's not that big an ask" were both your words, which is why I said you were contradicting yourself. It wasn't clear. Now I see that the former statement is part of the headline from the article you linked.

That said, no it's not obvious that the costs are worth it. Instead of just caterwauling about how obvious it is, why not put forth a real argument so that it become obvious to the rest of us?

Jimmy hates Columbus and never misses an opportunity to mention all the ways that's true. Ironic to be accusing others of having a schtick.

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by PerryMason614

People want cul de sacs. They don't want transients and people who don't belong there walking and driving through their neighborhoods.

Sidewalks are overrated, though a little more connectivity for bike trails would be fine.

End of discussion.

Plenty of people do not want cul-de-sacs. And sidewalks don't bring transients and "people who don't belong", whatever that means.

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by cheech14

All your posts are always about building these dumb straw men to tear down. Who actually claims Columbus is an "urban oasis"? It's built much like 99% of American cities are- with an urban core surrounded by sprawl. That's true of every Ohio city and almost every city in the country. There are like maybe half a dozen truly urban cities in the entire nation, and none of them are in Ohio.

As for the lack of sidewalks, almost all the neighborhoods that lack them were built between 1950-1980, when priorities and policies were different than they are now. The city has been trying to fill in the gaps in the sidewalk network over time, if not somewhat too slowly. I don't think it's so much a cost issue as a labor issue, though.

So this isn't urban?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1127...8192?entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Go...2jwk?entry=ttu

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

So this isn't urban?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1127...8192?entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Go...2jwk?entry=ttu

Yes, absolutely those are examples of urban neighborhoods, and apparently you didn't read what I said.

Let met quote the relevant part you missed:
It's built much like 99% of American cities are- with an urban core surrounded by sprawl.

I literally said that cities have an urban core, which is where those images were taken from- practically in the middle of Cleveland and Cincinnati's downtown. Columbus has this too.
I would like to believe that you don't actually think, however, that the only type of neighborhood that can count as "urban" is the literal downtown of a city. Maybe you should give you definition of what you think defines "urban" to you. Is it building height? Density? Walkability? Access to transit? To what standard?

Let's try an exercise. Which of the following images are urban and which aren't? I won't make it easy by adding obviously urban images from downtown, but instead images of other types of places.
First up, we have a single-family-dominated neighborhood with small lots built 100+ years ago. Built on a grid. Population density is medium to high (Around 8000PPSM) And yes, sidewalks. Relatively low diversity, bus transit access nearby.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/aBVJhpQ4oTmJbmvi6

Next, here's a mid-late 20th Century, single-family neighborhood. Not on a grid. Medium to high density (About 7300PPSM). Very diverse population. Sidewalks. Bus transit access nearby.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/j8BKqEfJqP96veAy6

Here's one a bit different. A very stroady-looking main road surrounded by neighborhoods of medium density (Close to 5500-6000PPSM), small lots, a gridded street network, historic buildings, higher diversity, bus transit access with BRT coming soon.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/5Qby6jZ6ouuRHthZ7

So you have 3 neighborhood views, and all of them have elements of what most people would say represents "urban", but are they in your view?

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by cheech14

It's built much like 99% of American cities are- with an urban core surrounded by sprawl.

Oh boy. Guess you don't get out much. That's actually laughable that 99% of American cities have a dinky urban core surrounded by sprawl...that's more of a Midwest thing there homie. And all of Ohio's cities are sub par in one way or another compared to larger, cities...you know, the type of cities that have sidewalks. I've been posting here since 2012 and this forum has seen more than its fair share of c-bus fanboys talking all kinds of smack about how great Columbus is and how crappy other cities compare to it...so ...you guys kind of earned that lighting rod thing where folks come in here and point out areas where Columbus could improve...but let's be clear...sidewalks aren't sparse in American cities, and it points to Columbus being behind the curve there buddy...city with barely any sidewalks is laughable. Cow town type stuff there, my ninja,

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by TomJones123

Oh boy. Guess you don't get out much. That's actually laughable that 99% of American cities have a dinky urban core surrounded by sprawl...that's more of a Midwest thing there homie. And all of Ohio's cities are sub par in one way or another compared to larger, cities...you know, the type of cities that have sidewalks. I've been posting here since 2012 and this forum has seen more than its fair share of c-bus fanboys talking all kinds of smack about how great Columbus is and how crappy other cities compare to it...so ...you guys kind of earned that lighting rod thing where folks come in here and point out areas where Columbus could improve...but let's be clear...sidewalks aren't sparse in American cities, and it points to Columbus being behind the curve there buddy...city with barely any sidewalks is laughable. Cow town type stuff there, my ninja,

I never said "dinky". I never said anything about the size of the urban core. I only stated that most cities have them to some degree, but that since WWII, every American city that could has sprawled beyond that central core. Different city boundary sizes is the only difference as to how much of that sprawl gets included in the city limits, but they all have it.
I would actually argue that the Sun Belt cities are the worst offenders of sprawl itself, not the Midwest cities.

What kind of smack am I talking? I made no reference to any specific city in comparison to Columbus, but rather made broad- and factual- statements about the state of how the majority of US cities have developed. It was to say that Columbus developed in a pretty standard way for an American city, good and bad.

And I think you're projecting hard here. I'm not a Columbus homer, and as far as I can tell, there aren't any Columbus homers on this forum. The imagined plight of the downtrodden Ohioan simply trying to correct the score about Columbus against a hoarde of irrational and very loud homers is kind of funny, to be honest. If anything, it's very much the opposite. Columbus is absolutely trashed on this forum by everyone. And that's fine, you're allowed to hate it. I just think the narrative about how the zero Columbus homers here are forcing you all to post in every thread how much it sucks is real Eric Andre meme vibes.

And come on, sidewalks aren't sparse in America? And you tell me I don't get out much.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by cheech14

I never said "dinky". I never said anything about the size of the urban core. I only stated that most cities have them to some degree, but that since WWII, every American city that could has sprawled beyond that central core. Different city boundary sizes is the only difference as to how much of that sprawl gets included in the city limits, but they all have it.
I would actually argue that the Sun Belt cities are the worst offenders of sprawl itself, not the Midwest cities.

What kind of smack am I talking? I made no reference to any specific city in comparison to Columbus, but rather made broad- and factual- statements about the state of how the majority of US cities have developed. It was to say that Columbus developed in a pretty standard way for an American city, good and bad.

And I think you're projecting hard here. I'm not a Columbus homer, and as far as I can tell, there aren't any Columbus homers on this forum. The imagined plight of the downtrodden Ohioan simply trying to correct the score about Columbus against a hoarde of irrational and very loud homers is kind of funny, to be honest. If anything, it's very much the opposite. Columbus is absolutely trashed on this forum by everyone. And that's fine, you're allowed to hate it. I just think the narrative about how the zero Columbus homers here are forcing you all to post in every thread how much it sucks is real Eric Andre meme vibes.

And come on, sidewalks aren't sparse in America? And you tell me I don't get out much.

Dude, leave the red herrings and straw man logic fallacies out of the equation. Funny though, I've only lived in Ohio about 14 years, you might have been in middle or high school back then, but Ohio is simply not the state to compare big cities. Cincinnati and Cleveland, with Cleveland being larger and more developed, are the only bright spots...and both cities have sidewalk outside their urban cores...dag bruh...60% of cbus is missing sidewalks. That baffles me because I have 30 years experience in the construction industry and used to frame the typical mcmansion sprawl-a-rama type affairs one can find in most suburbs in America, and they had sidewalks. Used to do a ton of concrete work...sidewalks aren't an anomaly restricted to downtowns there, buddy. I mean, they're pretty common.