U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-04-2013, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,304 posts, read 26,308,417 times
Reputation: 11754

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
But Denver is better than Pittsburgh for transit.
That may very well be true. I haven't lived in either. Why do you suppose, however, that more people are living car free in Pittsburgh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2013, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,043 posts, read 102,757,343 times
Reputation: 33089
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
That may very well be true. I haven't lived in either. Why do you suppose, however, that more people are living car free in Pittsburgh?
Off the top of my head:

More poverty/low income people there

Less interest in going to the mountains, the ski areas, etc. While one can get to the mountains (actually foothills) of eastern Jefferson County, CO on the RTD, to get any farther into the wilderness, one needs a car. The only ski area accessible by RTD, by virtue of it being the only ski area in the RTD, is Eldora. There used to be a train to Winter Park from downtown Denver, but no more, though there's talk of reviving it. To go to Vail, Breck, Copper Mtn, etc, one needs a car, a friend who has one, or a charter bus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2013, 02:23 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,304 posts, read 26,308,417 times
Reputation: 11754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Off the top of my head:

More poverty/low income people there

Less interest in going to the mountains, the ski areas, etc. While one can get to the mountains (actually foothills) of eastern Jefferson County, CO on the RTD, to get any farther into the wilderness, one needs a car. The only ski area accessible by RTD, by virtue of it being the only ski area in the RTD, is Eldora. There used to be a train to Winter Park from downtown Denver, but no more, though there's talk of reviving it. To go to Vail, Breck, Copper Mtn, etc, one needs a car, a friend who has one, or a charter bus.
Hmm...I would have figured Pittsburgh would have more people living car free because it's more walkable. I don't consider either city to be all that transit-oriented. But Pittsburgh seemed to have the more walkable core of the two.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2013, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,043 posts, read 102,757,343 times
Reputation: 33089
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Hmm...I would have figured Pittsburgh would have more people living car free because it's more walkable. I don't consider either city to be all that transit-oriented. But Pittsburgh seemed to have the more walkable core of the two.
Seriously? Everything in Pittsburgh is either uphill or downhill from where you start. It's an extremely hilly city. It doesn't get *that* cold there, but it rains a lot. It snows on snow there. Denver, the city, is fairly flat, and there are many more sunny days and pleasant weather there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2013, 02:53 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,080,368 times
Reputation: 14811
Eh. I actually find hills a plus for walkability. I like good views. I've lived in worse climates than Pittsburgh without a car, and it didn't seem to interfere either. Hills have more of an effect for bikeability, though the time I lived in a hilly town I learned to cope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2013, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,304 posts, read 26,308,417 times
Reputation: 11754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Seriously? Everything in Pittsburgh is either uphill or downhill from where you start. It's an extremely hilly city. It doesn't get *that* cold there, but it rains a lot. It snows on snow there. Denver, the city, is fairly flat, and there are many more sunny days and pleasant weather there.
The downtown area didn't seem all that hilly. But I didn't do all that much walking. Perhaps it's different when you're on foot.

But all in all, I don't think hills make that much of a difference in terms of walkability. I've walked all over San Francisco and Seattle and I don't consider myself to be the most avid walker. Upper Manhattan is also rather hilly but I don't find that to have much if any impact on pedestrian activity and walkability.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2013, 03:24 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
87,043 posts, read 102,757,343 times
Reputation: 33089
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Eh. I actually find hills a plus for walkability. I like good views. I've lived in worse climates than Pittsburgh without a car, and it didn't seem to interfere either. Hills have more of an effect for bikeability, though the time I lived in a hilly town I learned to cope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
The downtown area didn't seem all that hilly. But I didn't do all that much walking. Perhaps it's different when you're on foot.

But all in all, I don't think hills make that much of a difference in terms of walkability. I've walked all over San Francisco and Seattle and I don't consider myself to be the most avid walker. Upper Manhattan is also rather hilly but I don't find that to have much if any impact on pedestrian activity and walkability.
To the best of my knowledge neither one of you is responsible for young children, to haul up and down those hills.
****
I was responding to a post regarding why I thought Denver was more walkable. It's flatter, pretty flat except on the NW side until you get out into the western burbs, and even there, vast stretches are flat or gently rolling. The weather is 1000x better (J/K); it doesn't rain as much, and when it does, except on rare occasions, it usually just rains for 1/2 hour or so, not all day like in Pgh. There's a saying that it doesn't snow on snow in Denver, which it certainly does in Pittsburgh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2013, 03:29 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,992 posts, read 42,080,368 times
Reputation: 14811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
To the best of my knowledge neither one of you is responsible for young children, to haul up and down those hills.
****
I was responding to a post regarding why I thought Denver was more walkable. It's flatter, pretty flat except on the NW side until you get out into the western burbs, and even there, vast stretches are flat or gently rolling. The weather is 1000x better (J/K); it doesn't rain as much, and when it does, except on rare occasions, it usually just rains for 1/2 hour or so, not all day like in Pgh. There's a saying that it doesn't snow on snow in Denver, which it certainly does in Pittsburgh.
I'm not responsible for young children, and many aren't. But as Bajan said, I don't think people walking and hilliness is much connected in general. Nor would I have thought being flat would help walkability. I'm sure the weather better out there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2013, 03:35 PM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,304 posts, read 26,308,417 times
Reputation: 11754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
To the best of my knowledge neither one of you is responsible for young children, to haul up and down those hills.
Not sure why that matters. I see tons of young mothers pushing strollers up St. Nicholas Ave all the time. Teen pregnancy in Harlem is about as contagious as small pox.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2013, 03:48 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,946 posts, read 15,064,828 times
Reputation: 4487
Seattle, Portland, Boston, Chicago, Philly, and San Francisco are the first that come to mind. There are others where you could theoretically live without a car but may not be able to experience all the city has to offer that way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top