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.
Yeah, DC has a walk score of 77 and LA has a walk score of 66. Although I'm suprised that DC isn't higher considering that it's so small and LA isn't lower because it's so spread out. DC has 21 neigborhoods with a wall score of 80 or over and LA has 20. There are 31 hoods that have a walk score of 70 or above in DC and 40 hoods in LA with a walk score of 70'or above. At 60 and above DC has 41 hoods compared to 61 for Los Angeles. LA borders of its neigborhoods tend to be much larger than DC.
Conclusion: DC is more walkable. LA is a little less walkable.
In my experience, Walkscore tends to overstate walkability a bit in LA and Miami. I think this is because the primary metric is merely how close you are to commercial amenities, not taking into account anything involving the built form that can enhance walkability. As both LA and Miami are dense, it basically "reads" the map of the city as being similar to an equally dense, but more urban city.
For example, Los Angeles gives MacAuthur Park the highest Walkscore besides DTLA in the city - 94. Yet the main commercial corridors look like this, and this.
Let's compare to DC. DC has a few neighborhoods with higher walkscores, so I'll compare to Adams Morgan, which has a walkscore of 95. It looks like this.
Both are clearly walkable. But both are not walkable to the same degree. Even if you discount the LA examples being more run down and catering to a more working-class clientele, the sidewalks are a lot smaller, and the roads are a lot wider and more heavily trafficked.
In my experience, Walkscore tends to overstate walkability a bit in LA and Miami. I think this is because the primary metric is merely how close you are to commercial amenities, not taking into account anything involving the built form that can enhance walkability. As both LA and Miami are dense, it basically "reads" the map of the city as being similar to an equally dense, but more urban city.
For example, Los Angeles gives MacAuthur Park the highest Walkscore besides DTLA in the city - 94. Yet the main commercial corridors look like this, and this.
Let's compare to DC. DC has a few neighborhoods with higher walkscores, so I'll compare to Adams Morgan, which has a walkscore of 95. It looks like this.
Both are clearly walkable. But both are not walkable to the same degree. Even if you discount the LA examples being more run down and catering to a more working-class clientele, the sidewalks are a lot smaller, and the roads are a lot wider and more heavily trafficked.
MacArthur park is pretty walkable. Not sure how those pictures show how it's less walkable. The only difference I see is that the commercial corridor doesn't have housing on top which is negated by the fact that westlake has a higher population density l than Morgan hill and apartments on the backside of the commercial district. There is even a subway stop near where you marked it. What kind of things can you walk to in that 95 neighborhood that you can't walk to in MacArthur park taking away MacArthur park is a low income area?
Edit: the first Link isn't even in westlake/MacArthur park. That's the southern part of koreatown.
Last edited by afropack-man; 07-20-2016 at 02:21 PM..
Pittsburgh's Golden Triangle is small, but in many places you feel like you could be in the middle of NYC. Many films portraying NYC as a backdrop are in fact shot in Pittsburgh.
MacArthur park is pretty walkable. Not sure how those pictures show how it's less walkable. The only difference I see is that the commercial corridor doesn't have housing on top which is negated by the fact that westlake has a higher population density l than Morgan hill and apartments on the backside of the commercial district. There is even a subway stop near where you marked it. What kind of things can you walk to in that 95 neighborhood that you can't walk to in MacArthur park taking away MacArthur park is a low income area?
Again, look at the streetscape. Adams Morgan has wide sidewalks, street trees, and a commercial drag which is only on a two-lane road (complete with bike sharrows). There's even some sidewalk cafes further on down the street. The LA business districts have narrow sidewalks which front on a four-lane road. There's no street trees, and no bike lanes at all. This makes a big difference in how pleasant walking is.
You can find poor areas in some cities which are walkable to the same extent as MacArthur Park and still feel more urban. For example, here in Philadelphia. Basically the same walkscore as the other examples, and lacking the sidewalk improvements of Adams Morgan. However, the sidewalk still seems wider than LA, and the road is certainly narrower.
Pittsburgh's Golden Triangle is small, but in many places you feel like you could be in the middle of NYC. Many films portraying NYC as a backdrop are in fact shot in Pittsburgh.
Pittsburgh's downtown was helped quite a good deal because city leaders during the 20th century decided to limit the number of surface lots downtown and keep parking garages expensive, which meant a lot of commuters stuck to transit compared to the average city of its size. Thus Downtown has very few "holes" in it.
That said, Pittsburgh is pretty typical for a Rust Belt city in having a no-man's land of parking lots, dusty old warehouses, and institutional buildings which surround downtown. It's getting better with new development in the Strip District and the like, but really we don't have a cohesive urban fabric. We have a great downtown, a "ring of ruin" and then isolated patches of urban (mostly rowhouse) neighborhoods like in the Lower Northside, South Side Flats, the East End, etc.
Again, look at the streetscape. Adams Morgan has wide sidewalks, street trees, and a commercial drag which is only on a two-lane road (complete with bike sharrows). There's even some sidewalk cafes further on down the street. The LA business districts have narrow sidewalks which front on a four-lane road. There's no street trees, and no bike lanes at all. This makes a big difference in how pleasant walking is.
You can find poor areas in some cities which are walkable to the same extent as MacArthur Park and still feel more urban. For example, here in Philadelphia. Basically the same walkscore as the other examples, and lacking the sidewalk improvements of Adams Morgan. However, the sidewalk still seems wider than LA, and the road is certainly narrower.
Those are not the only things that make an area walkable. More aesthetically pleasing yes, walkable? No. There are many things that make an area walkable, it's not a definitive list. The thousands of people walking throughout that area everyday is proof enough.
Also, there are bike lanes in commercial districts in LA Sharrows and lanes so I'm not sure where you got that from. Spring st in DTLA is just on example. Venice Blvd is another. Wilshire Blvd is mix bus and bike lane.
There are also cafes and bars in westlake. The bars being hipster joints and the coffee places being more like Starbucks and that nature.
That said, Pittsburgh is pretty typical for a Rust Belt city in having a no-man's land of parking lots, dusty old warehouses, and institutional buildings which surround downtown. It's getting better with new development in the Strip District and the like, but really we don't have a cohesive urban fabric. We have a great downtown, a "ring of ruin" and then isolated patches of urban (mostly rowhouse) neighborhoods like in the Lower Northside, South Side Flats, the East End, etc.
This better than many cities, in which an old downtown may be the only urban place in the entire city.
In my experience, Walkscore tends to overstate walkability a bit in LA and Miami. I think this is because the primary metric is merely how close you are to commercial amenities, not taking into account anything involving the built form that can enhance walkability. As both LA and Miami are dense, it basically "reads" the map of the city as being similar to an equally dense, but more urban city.
Walkscore is trying to measure how practical walking is for daily activities; not how pleasant it is, which is somewhat subjective. Walkscore's not discounting for aesthetics is the correct choice, IMO, as long as the design isn't hostile to pedestrians (long detours to cross the road, lack of sidewalks, long walk from sidewalk to store through big parking lots, etc.).
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.
