Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago
 [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 10-09-2008, 07:52 AM
 
Location: In my view finder.....
8,515 posts, read 16,186,581 times
Reputation: 8079

Advertisements

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-09-2008, 07:59 AM
 
Location: Chicago- Hyde Park
4,079 posts, read 10,397,265 times
Reputation: 2658
I've seen this before- I think the far southside messes up for the rest of the city- there aren't many stores so you need a car to get the necessities
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 08:15 AM
 
11,975 posts, read 31,803,926 times
Reputation: 4645
I agree that San Francisco, New York, and Boston are the most walkable cities in the country. All three are more consistently walkabe than Chicago. The city of Chicago has some VERY walkable neighborhoods mixed with others that aren't walkable at all. Many Chicago neighborhoods were walkable in the past, but have declined due to demolitions, lack of businesses, dismantling of "L" and streetcar lines, and poor post-war planning decisions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 09:36 AM
 
11 posts, read 24,024 times
Reputation: 12
Philadelphia, except for a very small part of the downtown, is NOT walkable at all. Where do these people get these numbers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 11:51 AM
 
11,975 posts, read 31,803,926 times
Reputation: 4645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew C. Sheffer View Post
Philadelphia, except for a very small part of the downtown, is NOT walkable at all. Where do these people get these numbers?
That's interesting. Why do you say that? In my limited Philadelphia experience I've found most of Philadelphia proper to be compact and walkable in that east coast city kind of way. But I'm not that familiar with the outlying neighborhoods. I assume the suburbs are largely post-war sprawl like everywhere else, but perhaps you can shed some light on this.

When you look at the majority of U.S. cities, most are so automobile-oriented and un-walkable that the bar is pretty low for this list! I'd say D.C. should be a little higher, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 12:21 PM
 
Location: Chicago - Logan Square
3,396 posts, read 7,214,622 times
Reputation: 3731
An important thing to remember about Walk Score is that they don't take public transit into account at all, which to me is essential for any city to be truly walkable. Also - "We are currently using "as the crow flies" distances rather than walking directions. This means if you live across the lake from a destination, we are assuming you will swim."

It's a really interesting site, but everyone should take these scores with a huge grain of salt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 12:31 PM
 
7,331 posts, read 15,391,361 times
Reputation: 3800
I think Walkscore is much more effective for specific addresses and neighborhoods than for whole cities.

My neighborhood has a walkscore of 95 and I can still find parking on the street with relative ease for the car I don't need, but appreciate having whenever I need to leave town or buy kitty litter and laundry detergent... from Costco
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-09-2008, 08:05 PM
 
Location: chicago
89 posts, read 267,923 times
Reputation: 24
Long Beach and LA? walkable? Even thought they're at the bottom of the list I wouldn't even put those cities on that list at all..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2008, 01:39 AM
 
Location: Arizona
3,763 posts, read 6,711,977 times
Reputation: 2397
For the most part Chicago is pretty walkable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2008, 09:14 AM
 
11 posts, read 22,759 times
Reputation: 10
It's a good idea in concept, but as others have hinted at, being close to "ammenities" is hardly the only factor for most people. I would think it'd be just as effective to rank population density. Come to think of it, I think that's all they are really approximating with the rankings.

It'll get really interesting when they take into account all the stuff they don't do today.

Boston is walkable because it's so, so small. Chicago downtown area say South Wacker to Michigan and Lake is a much longer haul than say Chinatown to Faneuil Hall in Boston.
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


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 > Illinois > Chicago

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:50 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top