this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
116 points (96.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

35318 readers
3549 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Is that amount of time common to walk in places in the world where cars don't dictate the layout of the community?

Im going to be making this walk tomorrow, no worries, I'm just curious if its normal in other places. Maps says its 1hour15minues for 2.3miles or 3.7Km.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lembot_0004@discuss.online 72 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

3.7Km

It is more like 40-50 minutes if you're in the town with actual roads, not just a corn field.

would you walk an hour and 15 minutes to go to say, the library?

Walking more than an hour just to get to one place? No, unless walking is a sub-goal. You know, the weather is nice, no tasks for today...

[–] Eq0@literature.cafe 57 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Would I? Depends on the day, the weather, the mood.

Would I regularly? No, I would either take public transport or the bike.

Would I need to? Also no, I live in a mid-sized city with many libraries and the closest one is 20 minutes walk away, the main one is some half an hour walk away in another direction. Access to municipal facilities was a key element in my decision of where to live.

I think that, because cars didn’t dictate the layout, things ended up being naturally closer by, such that long walks would be fairly unusual within the city.

[–] other_cat@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 weeks ago

Heck I live in a moderately sized town and the library is a 10-15 minute walk away.

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 38 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Walk? No. I would cycle there. Get some bike bags so you can bring some books back.

[–] Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 month ago

Yes that makes sense. Good to know it's not a common walking length for everyday. I thought I was being lazy not wanting to make the trip on foot. I'll be two and a half hours walking for a 45 minute meeting ..

I wish cars didn't rule everything here

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

That's biking distance boss

As a long time (former) NYer, my maximum walk length is about 20m. Anything further than that and I'm taking public transit. The exception is when it's a nice day out and I want to walk, in which case it's just until I get tired

[–] Kennystillalive@feddit.org 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If it's free time and I don't have any appointments yes. If I have to be there regularly and as appointmemt, I would use public transport on the way there and walk the way back.

[–] Madzielle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

These answers are great. I thought so. Folks mentioned bikes. I didn't think about the bike, there isn't biking infrastructure in place, and mines been broke in the shed for years. But yeah that would probably be the best way in my situation, if I didn't have to cross like 5 death traps to use it. The public transport comments make me laugh. I wish.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Don't forget that scooters are also popular these days, both electric and non-electric. They need less infrastructure and are cheaper than bikes, but please wear a fucking helmet. Roller blades depending on the surface or even Skateboarding can also be used to cut the time/effort.

[–] edb_fyr@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

I am from Denmark where the biking infrastructure is also pretty good, so I will almost always take the bike if I'm going somewhere that is further than 1 km away (~.6 miles).

But that is just if I'm going somewhere -- taking a 4 km walk just for the sake of the walk and getting some fresh air (especially when the weather is nice) is quite normal here.

[–] ILikeTraaaains@lemmy.world 10 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

A walkable environment also means good public transport.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] citizensongbird@lemmy.world 9 points 4 weeks ago

I'd walk that for pleasure, but not for work. Time for you to get a bike.

[–] Michal@programming.dev 9 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Walkable means all you need is in reasonable walking distance.

I wouldn't consider my neighbourhood to be particularly walkable as it's a suburb (in Europe) but my library is about 15 mins walk away.

Sometimes the amenity you need isn't in that walkable range, but cycling is a great alternative.

[–] Ziggurat@jlai.lu 9 points 4 weeks ago

In general no

However, a sunny Sunday, walking 1h to do something may be part of the fun.

For distance above roughly a km, I use bicycle or even bus/train

[–] chaosCruiser@futurology.today 8 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

That's too much for walking. I would take a bike in that case.

Here's what I consider common:

  1. Walk 10 minutes to the train station
  2. Get to the city center while scrolling Lemmy on your phone.
  3. Walk in the center to visit some fancy stores. Maybe like 15-20 minutes in one direction.
  4. Buy some specialty coffee, fancy kitchen knives, Bialetti rubber rings or whatever.
  5. Walk back to the station: 15-20 minutes.
  6. Battery is nearly dead, and I forgot to bring a charger with me. I guess I'll just stare out the window.
  7. Walk back home: 10 min.

In total, that's going to be like an hour, but it's divided into multiple parts. Walking that much in just one direction is something I would prefer to avoid. If the library is a 60 min walk away, that's the same as like 12 bus stops or 15 minutes while sitting in a bus. BTW that 15 minutes includes walking at both ends of the journey. I would definitely choose public transport over walking in that case.

If the destination is just 15 minutes walk away from your house, that's perfectly normal, and not a problem in any way. If it's like 20 minutes away, I would begin to consider using a bike or maybe even a bus.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ILoveUnions@lemmy.world 8 points 4 weeks ago

I'd bike it. 2.3 miles should only be a 45 minute walk for a normal person unless there's bad stop lights (assume ~20 minute miles). On a bike it's less than 15

[–] Beacon@fedia.io 6 points 1 month ago

In NYC everything is within like a 15 minute walk, including the library

If the library is the all day activity then sure! Great start and end to it.

[–] Vanth@reddthat.com 6 points 4 weeks ago (4 children)

2.3 miles wouldn't take me an hour and 15 min. More like 45 min one way, walking 3.5 - 4 mph.

I would not walk that regularly for the library. I would bike or more likely drive due to time, weather, and some roads between my home and the library not really being suitable to walk/bike safely the whole way. My immediate neighborhood is bike/walk friendly, but as I go out 1 - 2 miles and further, they are very much car roads not built with cyclists and pedestrians in mind.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

In my city, there are enough libraries that few if any residents are that far from one (I’m a block away from one myself).

In theory, I’d walk that far if the library had a rare book or something else unique I wanted to see; but if I just wanted a place to read I’d go to a café, and if I wanted a generally-available book I’d go to a bookstore. (I figure most books worth walking that far for are worth owning.)

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 5 points 4 weeks ago

Yes. I would but no it would not take that long. I walked to and from work 3 miles for awhile and it was about 45 mins. A neat thing with walking is that the time is very consistant. If I walked pretty much as fast as I could and was lucky on street lights and such I could almost make it in 35 minutes but if I took my sweet ass time it was hard to get to an hour. If I was taking one hour and 15minutes I should be able to get to a library that was 5 miles away. I have regularly walked to my current library in recent times and its about a mile and a half away but I have not really kept track of how long it takes me.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

Probably not. And no, I've done maybe an hour, but more likely 45 minutes to a library in a car centric city, and now somewhere with public transit I don't think you're ever more than a half hour walk from one

This is part of why I'm so vocal about increasing walkability. There's a cascading effect with increasing walkability as more and more is easily walkable less people need cars and there's more demand for walkability and mass transit solutions.

The fact that I've lived in cities (including major ones) where the public transit is a bus that comes every hour and I've lived where it's faster to take the train to go to a lot of places. If transit sucks, only the poor take it. In many places the bus is treated as welfare not mass transit. It can't improve until the area is willing to invest in distant returns. Not investing however will eventually hit growing urban areas with worse and worse conditions and traffic

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 5 points 4 weeks ago
[–] remon@ani.social 5 points 4 weeks ago

I wouldn't walk any distance for a library.

But even it was a place I actually wanted to go, 10 minutes walking distance is about the maximum. For anything more there has to be a tram (or at least a bus).

[–] froggycar360@slrpnk.net 5 points 4 weeks ago

If it’s more than a 20 minute walk I’m biking, if it’s more than a 30 minute bike ride I’m driving, if it’s more than a 40 minute drive I’m not going.

[–] thisisdee@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

No, but walkable places would probably have public transport access as well? If so I'd take the bus. I think I generally consider 15-20 minutes to be "walkable" if I need to go often (train/metro stations, grocery stores). For the occasional trips I'd consider 1 hour walk one way. Anything longer I would probably skip or find alternative ways to get there (including taxis/ride shares)

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago

If that’s the round trip, yes. I do that daily. But one way? No.

[–] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 4 weeks ago

I don’t do walks longer than 20 minutes unless it’s for pleasure, thankfully the bus can get me most places I want to go beyond that. The terrain also makes a difference, I’d be less inclined to do 20 minutes uphill or across multiple freeways or something.

[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 weeks ago

Last time I lived in a city, 15m is where I'd take the bus instead.

[–] theywilleatthestars@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

No, and my closest library is closer to 15 minutes away.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It has been observed through history humans have been willing to spend up to half an hour each way on their daily commute. It doesn't matter if they are walking, biking, driving, flying, or something else, half an hour is the typical budget. Some people do go much longer (transit often allows for little longer if it is otherwise good enough that you can do something else while riding) , but that half an hour rule tends to stand across all cultures. Anyone who has farther to go will move.

That is daily commutes though. People often lived in a village near their field, but every few weeks would make the much longer trip to the town (city?) where there is a bigger market day. You don't do this every day, but for a once or twice a a month trip it can be worth it.

So back to your question is this a regular daily trip to the library - half an hour is the most you get, so you need to have multiple locations in all but the smallest towns. If this is however the big central library with a special collection of some sort people will make a 2 hour walk every few weeks if there is something special you cannot do at the local library.

Realistically I'd aim for a small library within 15 minutes for everyone because shorter distances makes it more likely people will go. You should try to have basic market places in the same location: basic groceries, a couple cafes, a few other shops, doctor and dentist offices.... That is the basics everyone wants close to home in one "central location" so it becomes habit to walk there a few times a week after work. People might go elsewhere to "costco" for their main shopping, but when you just need a cup of sugar this is close enough to send a kid alone while you finishing supper.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] artiman@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago

If it's a nice library sure

[–] Goldholz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (6 children)

What stops to put a tram there? Or bike there? Thats then 10-20 minutes from my experience

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

Nah that's too much. Most I did regularly was going to a big mall, 2km away, about 25min walk

[–] Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 4 points 4 weeks ago

Grew up in a small town, the library was about 15 minutes walk. Used to go there three times a week. I miss those days.

[–] insaneinthemembrane@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

No, that's way too far just for the library. I'd do that for pleasure but right now I'm time poor and can't afford that for a general task.

[–] Nibodhika@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

I can, and have in the past, it's not that big of a deal, but it's not something I do regularly. Here's the thing, 4km takes about 1h walking, 30min by bus/tram, 20min by car (then another 10min finding a place to park), or 15min by bike. This is why bikes are so ubiquitous in European cities, you can get to places usually much faster than by public transport, and sometimes even faster than cars since they have to do weird paths and skip entire neighborhoods.

I normally would take public transport for such distances, mostly because I don't own a bike and sweat more than I'm comfortable with when I ride one, and don't mind the extra 15min of listening to music.

[–] Otherbarry@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 4 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

Maybe? Does seem a bit much. I already walk about 40 mins to get to work and that's at the higher end of what most people would walk.

But I would maybe do it if there were other things near that library that I need to go to. Have multiple destinations in mind for a longer walk like that.

EDIT: The library by me is about a 5 minute walk for what it's worth. Same for groceries & other stuff.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] blarghly@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

If you ride a bike it would only be about 15 min each way.

[–] kepix@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago

no, but i would bike 10 minutes

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 3 points 1 month ago

I live in the US and even my walk to the library isn't that bad. Ive done walks that long or a bit longer as a novelty or to get exercise, but in general no, about half an hour is about as long as I "normally" like to go without looking into a bus or something.

[–] a4ng3l@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

Nope. That’s would be about the whole of my daily free time just walking over there and back. As I’m aging time is becoming the absolute scarce resource :-(

[–] viking@infosec.pub 3 points 4 weeks ago

Maybe on a nice day, but then really because I want to take a walk, and not out of necessity.

[–] Bruncvik@lemmy.world 3 points 4 weeks ago

Today, my longest walk was 6.8 km. Took about 2 hours, but I had frequent stops as I was collecting kids from their schools and taking them to their respective sports clubs. When I have to go to the office, I run commute, 8 km each way. My watch says that my average step count for the past 7 days is 20,109 per day. I may be an extreme case, but walking 3.7 km to the library would be so routine I wouldn't even think of taking a bus.

[–] florencia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 month ago

It's gonna be real annoying for future me with arthritis.

[–] ArsonButCute@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Where I grew up it was about a 45 minute walk to the library. I went maybe twice a year.

Now I'm about 15 minutes from the library and I'm there weekly.

Its a perfectly fine walk to go that far, it just kinda blows to do it regularly

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›