Which of metro (including suburbs) is most walkable and has a population that best integrates walking into daily life? (state, places)
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.
The cities in this poll are not conventional urban places with famously robust street scenes. That's okay. I'm still interested in which of them has not only a walkable metro, but where people actually do walk--to the store, cafe, train, whatever. A place where it's not at all rare to see people just walking places or walking for leisure. I'm also asking about metrowide walkability. It's great that a place has a really active urban core, and that is probably an essential start to any walkable metro, but if the streets outside of that urban core are like a scene from Deliverance, then that's not really a walkable place.
Jersey Suburbs? They are very car sprawly as they grew fast during the 40s/50s/60s era from farmland.
Albeit, Hoboken and JC ... Northern NJ suburbs are not very walkable at all.
In my experiences, NJ has some of the least walkable suburbs. Especially around Weehawken, Hackensack, Piscataway, Parsippany, etc..
Jersey Suburbs? They are very car sprawly as they grew fast during the 40s/50s/60s era from farmland.
Albeit, Hoboken and JC ... Northern NJ suburbs are not very walkable at all.
In my experiences, NJ has some of the least walkable suburbs. Especially around Weehawken, Hackensack, Piscataway, Parsippany, 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.