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 this is pretty bad, lol. Never heard of these people, but their assessment tool is pretty vaguely described. From their website:
"A draft community assessment tool was created to comprehensively evaluate a community’s walkability. This rating tool is covers the 5 E’s (Engineering, Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, & Evaluation) and other elements (including planning) that are needed to help communities set clear goals and plans for achieving those goals. The draft tool provided the foundation for the existing assessment tool.
The assessment tool was then pilot tested in three communities of varying demographics. These communities include a small town (Cedarburg, WI), a small town with a college and commuter population (Davidson, NC), and a large city (Orlando, FL). The contributions of these communities helped shape the program. Through their suggestions and feedback, the tool was revised to capture information more accurately and easily."
It's pretty unclear exactly how things like education, encouragement, enforcement, and "evaluation" (???) are evaluated, or even weighted.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,134 posts, read 7,586,619 times
Reputation: 5796
Quote:
Originally Posted by btownboss4
It is also factoring in improvements. So if your city built more sidewalks or pedestruanized a commercial street, or enhanced bump outs at intersections etc. it ranks high even if it’s not very walkable on an absolute scale.
Plus Boston and Philly actually have some terrible sidewalks in a lot of areas, but are saved by the overall unnavigable nature of their streets (and Boston drivers relatively respectful treatment of Jaywalkers) , so it might not really show up as well as it should on a study of infrastructure.
This is accurate, and basically the gist of it. Boston, and Philly both are "more walkable" than the majority of cities in the nation, but this study apparently wanted to put an emphasis on pedestrian safety.
Hoboken is more walkable than most on the Platinum list, let alone the Gold list. I work in Manhattan, and live in Hoboken, and Hoboken is more walkable on nearly every level as it was built entirely on a human scale. You are never more than an 8-minute walk from a grocery store, a doctor, a dentist, dry cleaners, schools, flower shops, etc. There has not been a traffic fatality in 4 years, and the speed limit for the entire town is 25 mph. The town takes pedestrian safety very seriously, and do things like put bike racks at dangerous intersections to avoid illegally parked cars blocking pedestrian sightlines. Incidentally, the Washington DC news had an article on what Hoboken can teach them about pedestrian safety:
In many cities, you can easily walk to bars or restaurants, but less so "every day stuff", which was my experience living in Uptown Dallas. Even in Manhattan, there are vast pockets without essentials like grocery stores or doctors.
It's interesting that Decatur has a higher walkscore than ATL. Are there other examples of a suburb being more walkable than the main city? Miami Beach maybe?
It's interesting that Decatur has a higher walkscore than ATL. Are there other examples of a suburb being more walkable than the main city? Miami Beach maybe?
I'm sure there's a handful, with the caveat that they will all be physically smaller than the core city so do it over a much smaller area (which makes it an easier compare). Santa Monica comes to mind, as does Cambridge (though Boston is obviously highly walkable in its own right).
I mean... The one place in Florida that should make a list like this would be Miami Beach, yet it is entirely omitted, while a place like Temple Terrace -- one of the least walk-friendly suburbs in the Tampa Bay area, gets an "honorable mention?"
This is also a program that cities apply for, not a survey.
The list in the OP is just the latest round of cities to be recognized for their commitment to improving the quality of their walking environments. A new batch of cities get recognized each year as more cities apply.
And the map on the home page includes all communities that have been recognized for a certain level of commitment to improving pedestrian safety and encouraging residents to walk as part of their daily routine (my interpretation, not their language) since the program began in 2011, i.e., this isn't an annual ranking.
IOW, Walk Score this ain't.
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.
