Quote:
Originally Posted by badrunner
^
Sidewalks, weather, landscaping, wildlife, air quality, visual interest, these are all things that can enhance walkability but are not normally taken into account on these rankings. This is especially true when you are ranking metro-wide walkability. The suburban built form in some cities is absolutely horrific and actively hostile to pedestrians.
|
From the report:
“Walkability” and Inclusive Language
This report analyzes the demand for housing and commercial
space in urban areas that can be traversed without a car—a
benefit we believe that everyone should be able to access.
To explain our findings, we often use the terms “walkability”
and “walkable” to describe places that can be conveniently
traveled by those using sidewalks, trails, and paths, whether
one is walking, using assistive devices like wheelchairs or
walkers, pushing strollers, or using some other means to get
around without a car. Much of the data in this report utilizes
information from the U.S. federal government which groups
people using assisted mobility devices in the same category
as those that walk to travel, making it challenging to isolate
access and the impact on people with disabilities. We continue
to look for data that would allow us to better analyze access
that includes people of all ages and abilities who choose to
walk, bike, or use assistive devices like wheelchairs or walkers.
- Public standards that outline specific elements in the public
realm, such as sidewalks, travel lanes, on-street parking, street trees, and furniture.
But again, part of the problem here is that when you look at an area it should be walkable but then in function it's really not.