Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The thing that’s also mind-blowing is that North America only has 9 cities that are compact, walkable, and offer strong public transit (complete opposite of Europe):
The thing that’s also mind-blowing is that North America only has 9 cities that are compact, walkable, and offer strong public transit (complete opposite of Europe):
NYC
Chicago
DC
Philly
Boston
SF
Toronto
Montreal
Vancouver
There are some additional, lower tier in this regard, cities where you can make it work in some situations and parts of the city such as Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa, Quebec City, Halifax, San Diego, Denver, Pittsburgh, Providence, New Haven, Baltimore, Milwaukee etc. which can work
The thing that’s also mind-blowing is that North America only has 9 cities that are compact, walkable, and offer strong public transit (complete opposite of Europe):
Having been to SF and Toronto, San Francisco has quite a bit more foot traffic. I was surprised just how sedate Toronto was. That said, it's downtown is quite a bit larger than San Francisco's.
I’ve been to both cities many times, and lived in Toronto years ago. I would say it’s probably a tie between them, as both cities are very busy during the work day, but I find Toronto busier on weekends and evenings, so I’m giving it to TO!
Measuring pedestrian activity by metro population is flawed for obvious reasons. If we look at that alone, places like LA, Phoenix, and Houston metros should be at the top of the list in terms of pedestrian foot traffic.
I think it has to do with many factors, including but not excluded to:
- transit coverage AND ridership; presence and implementation of transit-oriented development policies that encourage non-auto travel patterns
- availability of pedestrian friendly streetscapes
- population density in and around a city's core
- general attitude among the population on topics like transit and automobile usage
And of course, pedestrian foot traffic varies drastically from neighborhood to neighborhood. In Toronto's case, it can be a night and day difference between its suburbs like Mississauga vs. more urban (non-CBD) neighorhoods like Davisville or Leslieville.
I like this list. I think some more things that can be considered are amount of people commuting from suburbs. Especially those by transit, which can add a ton to daytime foot traffic. This is one way how Metro area population can matter. For example I know for Manhattan they say the population doubles each work day due to all the commuters. I don’t know the numbers for Chicago or Toronto but I’m sure they see some of this as well.
And another thing is amount of tourists. They can be very annoying sometimes, but there’s no denying that they can have a huge effect on foot traffic.
I also like what 1995 said about looking into non-core neighborhoods. Obviously the core of any city will have the largest amounts of pedestrian traffic and transit access and all that, but looking into regular neighborhoods away from the core can probably tell you a lot more about how the majority of the city really is. How the regular person lives in a regular neighborhood in the city. Even though the city cores will always be looked at more often, in a way the neighborhoods away from the CBD can tell the full story. I think it says a lot when you can find these things you’ve listed, and people always out walking in neighborhoods away from the core.
Comparing Chicago to Toronto, in terms of metro populations, is apples to apples, since they are both compact, walking cities where a large portion of people walk and/or take public transit.
A city like LA has no relevance to the discussion, since it is a sprawling, driving city where virtually no one walks and/or takes public transit.
A sprawling city, no matter how big, will always have poor foot traffic.
I’ve been to both SF and Toronto. The foot traffic is significantly greater in Toronto.
I travel to Toronto to work now on a weekly basis, and would like to dispute the claim that these are "compact, walkable cities". Sure, certain neighborhoods of these cities are walkable, but to say that these are "compact walkable" cities you are implying that they are somehow on par with actual "compact and walkable cities" - London, Madrid, Berlin, Munich, NYC, which is misleading and simply not the case.
The City of Toronto proper may have walkable areas - but even then - there are large swaths of the city proper like North York, Scarborough, and Etobicoke which are predominantly single family bedroom communities. Even in immediate areas around downtown Toronto, it's relatively easy to find wide 4 or 5 lane streets that have little pedestrian activities and are designed for cars and cars only e.g. Mount Pleasant, Avenue Road, University Avenue.
Also, when you lump in 6 million for Toronto's metro population, you are including suburbs like Mississauga, Brampton, and Ajax, which are hardly walkable by any objective standard.
Last edited by bostonkid123; 02-05-2018 at 08:20 AM..
Lower Manhattan is also incredibly dense and nearly everyone arrives by transit and walks. Possibly a factor?
Brooklyn has busy spots but aside from the peak areas (shopping districts etc.) the pedestrian traffic isn't huge.
Small blocks make a more walkable city. But I bet the effect I'm talking about has several times the effect that this does regarding concentration on Manhattan avenues.
I think that’s just how Midtown is set up (it seems when you say Manhattan, you’re really just talking about Midtown). Just look at 34th Street, 42nd, and 57th, and 59th. They’re just as bustling as any of the avenues even though they are very long blocks. It seems you’re really just comparing the bigger, busier corridors to the smaller ones. Every N/S corridor in Midtown was designed to be a big, major street. It just so happens that going North/South are the short blocks. Going East/West are the long blocks with mostly smaller streets except for the ones that I’ve mentioned (34th, 42nd, 57th, 59th). So basically, busy major street = lots of foot traffic. Whether it’s E/W, N/S, short, or long.
At night however, I find the reverse is true. Toronto seems to be busier after 6pm than it is before. Chicago's crime rate hurts it's night pedestrian flow. Although the clubs are busy I find people tend to take taxis to get there whereas Torontonians walk, meander, and sit outside on the endless number of cafes and patios which are not near as common in Chicago. Canadians in general are MUCH more likely to sit outside than Americans and you can see it in the number of cafes/patios in Canada compared to the far fewer in American cities. SF I also find busier at night than Chicago.
During office/business hours 1st Chicago, 2nd SF, 3rd Toronto.
At night and weekends 1st Toronto, 2nd SF, 3rd Chicago.
Is that a thing? Americans are known to not eat outside? I don’t know about that. I know in NY and Philly that eating outside is a pretty big thing. Especially those first few warm days of Spring. Now that I think about it, I wouldn’t be surprised if eating outside was a rarity in the driving cities, which make up the majority of the country, so you might actually be right.
And I hadn’t even thought about nightlife. That’s definitely another huge thing. Nightlife pedestrian activity is my favorite kind. I think this can almost be broken down into categories:
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
