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.
I'm very familiar with Denver, and I think it's much more walkable than Seattle. I've stayed in Seattle for up to 3 weeks at a time, & it's really pretty. But it's not quite as easy to get around without a car as Denver is.
But if you're looking for a more urban place, Seattle is a little more urban than Denver. Denver has more open space & less crowds. I guess you kinda have to think which one's more important to you: living in a walkable city or an urban city
Jessie
Can you elaborate on why it's easier to get around without a car? Because from the pictures and the streetviews posted earlier, Seattle does seem to have a more walkable streetscape.
So what is that makes it so much easier to get around in Denver? The flat terrain? Are the neighborhoods better connected? Details would be much appreciated!
I'm very familiar with Denver, and I think it's much more walkable than Seattle. I've stayed in Seattle for up to 3 weeks at a time, & it's really pretty. But it's not quite as easy to get around without a car as Denver is.
But if you're looking for a more urban place, Seattle is a little more urban than Denver. Denver has more open space & less crowds. I guess you kinda have to think which one's more important to you: living in a walkable city or an urban city
Jessie
This is my first time posting (been reading the boards for a while, though), because I actually know both of these cities pretty well, and feel like I can offer a good perspective.
Overall, Id have to disagree with Jesse. I think Seattle is easier to get around without a car. Seattle's urban core of Downtown, Pioneer Square, Westlake, Belltown, Lower Queen Anne, Capitol Hill, International District, First Hill, and the currently developing South Lake Union is all pretty walkable, moreso than Downtown, Lodo, Uptown, and Capitol Hill in Denver. It also covers a larger area. I also think Seattle's outer neighborhoods (Fremont, Ballard, U-District, etc) are significantly more walkable than Denver's.
I agree with whoever said that getting between neighborhoods in Seattle (outside of the urban core) can sometimes be difficult, but I also felt that way in Denver. The light rail is definitely better in Denver than Seattle, but it still doesnt cover that much of the city. Seattle has a better bus system, and much stronger and more walkable neighborhoods cores.
Both are suburban cities compared to places like New York, Boston, or San Francisco, but Denver has wider streets, more parking lots, and generally a less urban/more car oriented feel to it.
On another note, I think people in Denver are less pretentious and more down to earth.
This is my first time posting (been reading the boards for a while, though), because I actually know both of these cities pretty well, and feel like I can offer a good perspective.
Overall, Id have to disagree with Jesse. I think Seattle is easier to get around without a car. Seattle's urban core of Downtown, Pioneer Square, Westlake, Belltown, Lower Queen Anne, Capitol Hill, International District, First Hill, and the currently developing South Lake Union is all pretty walkable, moreso than Downtown, Lodo, Uptown, and Capitol Hill in Denver. It also covers a larger area. I also think Seattle's outer neighborhoods (Fremont, Ballard, U-District, etc) are significantly more walkable than Denver's.
I agree with whoever said that getting between neighborhoods in Seattle (outside of the urban core) can sometimes be difficult, but I also felt that way in Denver. The light rail is definitely better in Denver than Seattle, but it still doesnt cover that much of the city. Seattle has a better bus system, and much stronger and more walkable neighborhoods cores.
Both are suburban cities compared to places like New York, Boston, or San Francisco, but Denver has wider streets, more parking lots, and generally a less urban/more car oriented feel to it.
On another note, I think people in Denver are less pretentious and more down to earth.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but Denver has a certain continuity and connectivity that Seattle lacks. There's something to be said for that in terms of overall walkability.
As I've said before, Seattle is a bizarre collage of a city (and its hilly terrain divided by lakes and canals adds to that balkanized effect). Parts feel something like Chicago, parts feel something like Brooklyn, parts feel something like Berkeley, parts feel something like Portland, parts feel something like L.A.--it is a very disjointed city to say the least. The urban dynamic is not consistant.
There are in-between areas of windy forested streets, broad industrial roads, and strip-mall laden avenues. At the same time, there are vibrant urban cores, walkable neighborhoods centers filled with storefronts, and civic-minded community hubs. They all sort of blend in together, and it creates a very walkable atmosphere in certain sections, and an unwalkable atmosphere in others.
Last edited by AcroJimmy2; 06-27-2010 at 04:28 AM..
I think for any city, but Seattle especially, it's important for you to look at where your office building is and neighborhoods you can afford/desire. Going between some of the neighborhoods outside the downtown core can be a pain, though the bus system in Seattle is top notch and it looks like the light rail is in for some expansion.
This may help (year old but hey...) San Francisco Tops List of 2009 Best Walking Cities in America
1 S.F.
2 Boston
3 N.Y.
4 Philly
5 Chicago
6 Wa. D.C.
7 Seattle
8 Honolulu
9 Portland
10 Pittsburgh
11 Oakland
12 Minneapolis
13 San Diego
14 L.A.
15 Milwaukee
16 Baltimore
17 Rochester
18 Santa Ana
19 San Jose
20 Denver
^ Please tell me how LA is number 14 but Miami isn't up there at all. Miami is way more compact than LA.
From the article: metro areas were evaluated based on 19 criteria, including population density per square mile, use of mass transit, crime rates, and square miles of local and state parks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 10 most dangerous metropolitan areas for pedestrians in 2007-2008 were Orlando, Tampa , Miami and Jacksonville, Florida; Memphis, Tennessee ; Raleigh, North Carolina ; Louisville, Kentucky ; Houston; Birmingham, Alabama; and Atlanta.
The three safest cities were Seattle ; Portland, Oregon; and Minneapolis-St. Paul.
I always laugh when I see Santa Ana on this list; it maybe walkable but it sure as hell isn't anywhere I would ever take a walk. As far as Denver vs. Seattle goes, my friends who grew up in Denver and now live in Seattle claim Seattle is in fact more walkable. The house I lived in when in Denver had a walk score of 97..so it is about location as far as I am concerned..I have not spent enough time in Seattle to debate, but my guess would be Seattle.
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.
