  Islandman Member Username: Islandman Post Number: 1196 Registered: 08-2004 |
1. Washington 2. Boston, Massachusetts 3. San Francisco, California 4. Denver, Colorado 5. Portland, Oregon 6. Seattle, Washington 7. Chicago, Illinois 8. Miami, Florida 9. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 10. New York 11. San Diego, California 12. Los Angeles, California 13. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 14. Atlanta, Georgia 15. Baltimore, Maryland 16. St. Louis, Missouri 17. Minneapolis, Minnesota 18. Detroit, Michigan 19. Columbus, Ohio 20. Las Vegas, Nevada 21. Houston, Texas 22. San Antonio, Texas 23. Kansas City, Missouri 24. Orlando, Florida 25. Dallas, Texas 26. Phoenix, Arizona 27. Sacramento, California 28. Cincinnati, Ohio 29. Cleveland, Ohio 30. Tampa, Florida http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/ 04/walkable.communities.ap/ind ex.html | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 2293 Registered: 04-2006 |
quote: Interesting. | ||
Tigers2005 Member Username: Tigers2005 Post Number: 167 Registered: 02-2005 |
quote: "But the chief factor, he said, is the success of the Metro. The 31-year-old rail system has transformed the region, shaping development and making the walkable urban model more viable. Leinberger calls rail transit a key factor in the success of walkable places. Roughly two-thirds of the 157 places he counted are served by rail, he said." How much more evidence do we need before we see that mass transit is a necessity? | ||
Lghart Member Username: Lghart Post Number: 117 Registered: 03-2004 |
This list has no validity if NYC is below Miami, give a break. I lived in both and there is no comparison, not a big lover of NYC but it should probably be in the top 3 for sure with a store on every corner and subway/bus system throughout the city. | ||
Islandman Member Username: Islandman Post Number: 1199 Registered: 08-2004 |
Lghart, I also agree, having lived in NYC and now Miami. I am thinking that they are looking at pockets of the city. Here in Miami, everything is spread out and you need a car (just as in Detroit), but the South Beach area and parts of downtown and Coral Gables are very walkable. Still, I would put NYC in the top 2 or 3 for sure. | ||
Danindc Member Username: Danindc Post Number: 3788 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Ever been to Jersey or Long Island??? | ||
Spaceboykelly Member Username: Spaceboykelly Post Number: 268 Registered: 04-2005 |
The study is including the metro area and I would argue that many parts of NYC and it's outer metro area are fairly "suburban" in design. Staten Island, some areas of Queens and as Danindc said, Long Island and Jersey. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 2295 Registered: 04-2006 |
Yes, the study was per capita (meaning number of walkable spaces per number of residents in the area). The population factor heavily weighs against NY metro despite Manhattan having the most locations on the list (there were 20 in Manhattan alone, whereas there were 21 in DC metro altogether) because there are over 20 million people in this area. | ||
Genesyxx Member Username: Genesyxx Post Number: 827 Registered: 02-2004 |
As far as being able to actually walk without having to get out of the way of speeding motorists is a different story. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 927 Registered: 12-2006 |
I haven't been to all of those cities, but frankly I was surprised Detroit was as high as 18th. Does anyone know what the "walkable places" of this area are supposed to be? | ||
Johnlodge Member Username: Johnlodge Post Number: 3971 Registered: 10-2003 |
Perhaps it is because of our smaller downtowns, like Bham, Royal Oak, Ferndale, Plymouth, etc, in addition to Downtown Detroit. That spreads our walkability around the region a bit, rather than it all being in one place. |
