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.
Miami's 'ghettos' are not like Chicago ghettos. Dreary landscapes of rotting homes, boarded up shops, and liquor stores.
They are loaded with stores and strip malls. You might not consider that the epitome of walkable but at least Miami residents do have their choices unlike the blacks in the middle of your Chicago's southside.
When was the last time you were in the ghetto walking around in Chicago? Not that I disagree with you (though I've been to areas that are actually walkable and have more than just liquor stores - Chicago Lawn on Kedzie Avenue is an example). And if you've actually walked around any of these areas (which I highly doubt you have) you would know they're much more full of beauty supply and barber shops, laundromats, and small community storefront churches than anything else.
Last edited by marothisu; 06-15-2015 at 11:22 AM..
Miami does have walkable areas, but it's the exception, not the rule. Downtown is a pedestrian nightmare, void of street level activity. Same with Brickell to a lesser degree. Most of these new high rises are on huge lots, very set back from the street, on parking podiums and with huge driveways going into them.
That being said, I don't believe Miami is at an unfair advantage having such tiny city limits. I do believe that larger cities such as LA are at an unfair disadvantage from having large city limits though.
Ugh, you're homerism for Miami makes me wonder if you can honestly make any assessment other than "Miami is Winning!" Miami has plenty going for it, but the fact that you've been to other top 10 cities and find Miami's spot truly worthy is telling.
Walkscore does NOT factor in the following things into their criteria:
*Street design
*Safety- from both crime in areas and from crashes
*Pedestrian-friendly design
*Topography
*Weather
*Quality of amenities
Big limitations, in my opinion. For example, a friend of mine just sold his house in Denver, and the realtor touted the 80+ walkscore to all perspectives. In reality, he's able to accomplish MUCH more of his daily shopping and commuting on foot in Seattle, while the Walkscore where he lives is in the 60's.
I think maybe we should clarify that being in proximity to goods and services may make things walkable, but other intangibles make places pedestrian-friendly. Just because you're close to some things around doesn't mean much if you're likely to get run over walking to them. But, I'll give it credit for density. So maybe it should be considered potentially great city for walking, though I still have a tough time imagining many of the residents walking anywhere to get groceries, especially when the Cayenne is waiting in the garage.
In general, Miami is still notoriously car-dependent.
Have you ever been to Miami? The city is quite walkable despite our propensity to run over pedestrians. Perhaps I should blame it on where these people come from since the vast majority of people from Miami weren't born here.
Miamian's love their cars (ever seen Miami Vice?) but it is pedestrian. You can live without a car in Miami but the question is do you want to?
I wonder what European cities would look like on walk score? Would most of the major cities be 80+ average? I can imagine cities like Paris or Rome above 90 average and would be number one in America since I considrr Paris and Rome far more walkable than NYC.
What have you to say about Houston ranking higher than Atlanta?
Walkscore kind of sucks. It doesn't really measure walkability, it measures how close you are to stuff by foot, regardless of the walking experience.
So, for example, a 12 lane suburban highway could be super walkable, as long as there's a sidewalk and a bunch of strip malls close to houses. But a very urban environment could be less walkable if there aren't nearby stores, and if the streets dead-end, even if the walking atmosphere is fantastic.
Miami does have walkable areas, but it's the exception, not the rule. Downtown is a pedestrian nightmare, void of street level activity. Same with Brickell to a lesser degree. Most of these new high rises are on huge lots, very set back from the street, on parking podiums and with huge driveways going into them.
That being said, I don't believe Miami is at an unfair advantage having such tiny city limits. I do believe that larger cities such as LA are at an unfair disadvantage from having large city limits though.
As do I. Walkscore needs to do more apples to apples comparisons.
Central LA and the Westside have a combined population of 1.3 million (DC and Boston's combined population), and over 85% of them live in neighborhoods with a minimum walkscore of 70, and over 50% live above 80, and over 17% live above 90.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
Walkscore kind of sucks. It doesn't really measure walkability, it measures how close you are to stuff by foot, regardless of the walking experience.
So, for example, a 12 lane suburban highway could be super walkable, as long as there's a sidewalk and a bunch of strip malls close to houses. But a very urban environment could be less walkable if there aren't nearby stores, and if the streets dead-end, even if the walking atmosphere is fantastic.
Which is kinda really important. People generally don't walk to stare at rowhouses, they walk to get to run errands, go to places, etc.
Miami does have walkable areas, but it's the exception, not the rule. Downtown is a pedestrian nightmare, void of street level activity. Same with Brickell to a lesser degree. Most of these new high rises are on huge lots, very set back from the street, on parking podiums and with huge driveways going into them.
Still an exceptional level of urbanity for the South. Miami and Chicago have the perfect level of urbanity, in my book.
Still an exceptional level of urbanity for the South. Miami and Chicago have the perfect level of urbanity, in my book.
I think you need a new "book", then, esp. for Miami.
Miami is not a particularly walker-friendly city, and is laughably far from "perfect" in terms of the pedestrian realm. Even right downtown isn't very pleasant from the pedestrian perspective. It's all giant parking garage podiums and blank walls.
Face it. Atlanta is more walkable than Houston. Get over it.
Neither are terribly walkable on the whole but Atlanta is a lot more walkable than Houston is. That is for sure.
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.
