New York city not the #1 walkable city anymore (designer, weather)

[SuperKirby]

SF has no true subway system. In NY, you walk anywhere two seconds and there is either a cab, subway, or bus. In SF, besides downtown, you have to walk like 20 mins to find those fun disney looking trolleys, or walk even further to find a BART station. they're right, SF is WAY, WAY more walkable then NY!

Actually, I would put Los Angeles at the top of the list. In LA, you would have to walk about 3 hours to get to the next rail. =)

[jawny08]

Originally Posted by SuperKirby

SF has no true subway system. In NY, you walk anywhere two seconds and there is either a cab, subway, or bus. In SF, besides downtown, you have to walk like 20 mins to find those fun disney looking trolleys, or walk even further to find a BART station. they're right, SF is WAY, WAY more walkable then NY!

Actually, I would put Los Angeles at the top of the list. In LA, you would have to walk about 3 hours to get to the next rail. =)

Excellent point! What good is walking if there aren't trains to walk to.

[Fred314X]

There was a thread in the General U.S. forum a while back about that "walkerscore" business. It's almost impossible to tell how they came up with their formula to determine what makes a city walkable...but whatever they did, they got it wrong. New York not a more walkable city than any other? Absolutely ridiculous! Nonsensical! Outrageous!

[Bluesmama]

San Francisco is a mixed bag for walking, as far as I'm concerned. For much of it one has to be healthy to take on all those hills. I have health limits and have to be really careful to not exert myself when I'm out walking the city, so I utilize the bus and other transit to my advantage whenever I'm there.

I spent 10 days in NY a few months ago and seldom had trouble walking. Parts of the Upper-Eastside have some incline, even reminded me a little of SF. But other than that it is nice and level. The only obstacle to easy walking could be all the pedestrians in that crowded city; however, New Yorkers move FAST. I was amazed at how quickly I was walking with the 5:00 "rush hour foot traffic".

Nah, it's New York over San Francisco.

[BigCityDreamer]

New York.

Heck, I don't even know how San Francisco is more walkable than Washington, D.C.

[TheCity]

I believe these statistics are flawed.

San Francisco is approximately 232 sq miles, while NYC is 469 sq miles.

[SuperKirby]

Originally Posted by TheCity

I believe these statistics are flawed.

San Francisco is approximately 232 sq miles, while NYC is 469 sq miles.

SF is only 46.7 sq miles (the rest is water) NYC is only 305 sq miles (the rest is water)
cant walk on water folks! at least most of us can't.

[BajanYankee]

What makes a neighborhood walkable?

• A center: Walkable neighborhoods have a center, whether it's a main street or a public space.
• People: Enough people for businesses to flourish and for public transit to run frequently.
• Mixed income, mixed use: Affordable housing located near businesses.
• Parks and public space: Plenty of public places to gather and play.
• Pedestrian design: Buildings are close to the street, parking lots are relegated to the back.
• Schools and workplaces: Close enough that most residents can walk from their homes.
• Complete streets: Streets designed for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit.

By their standards, San Francisco should not be on the list at all because it certainly lacks affordable housing.

[OyCrumbler]

The methodology is on the site itself. It's easy to see why NYC ranks lower given the methodology since this is all about the percentage of walkable neighborhoods within the city rather than total area of contiguous or overall walkable areas. Certainly Manhattan is far more walkable than SF as is much of the rest of the city. If you look at their graphical overlay for walkable neighborhoods, it's obvious that Staten Island and certain in-city amenities such as the two airports, Pelham Bay Park, and islands such as Governor's will bring the overall percentage down.

It's kind of refreshing to see another area screwed by statistics isn't it? SF, Boston, and DC get it all the time for having such tiny physical boundaries despite being at the heart of some of the largest and most powerful metros in the US.

[Infamous92]

Lol I just walked over a mile in the 90+ degree heat which normally doesn't bother me but I'm not acclimated to Summer yet. If I want to walk to a store I always have to walk a mile.

I think the city's not very walkable areas brought it's score down, plus NYC is very huge geographically.