Least Walkable Cities

When Walk Score recently released their ranking of the ten most walkable U.S. cities there was no doubt that folks in places like San Francisco, Boston and New York City could look with satisfaction upon their city as a paradise for bipedalism. But when we took a look at the rankings it became clear that there was quite a spread between some of the most and least friendly areas for walking in which to live. In fact, it's not so improbable to imagine that some citizens of major U.S. cities often feel like the person pictured here when compared to their counterparts in those where walking is a way of life.

But the question is, does your city make the list of our least walkable U.S. cities?

Following is the list, created by Walk Score, of the least walkable major cities in the U.S.

Top 10 Least Walkable U.S. Cities

1. Jacksonville
2. Nashville
3. Charlotte
4. Indianapolis
5. Oklahoma City
6. Memphis
7. Kansas City
8. Fort Worth
9. El Paso
10. Mesa

via: Walk Score

More on Walkable U.S. Cities
Walk Score Ranks Top 10 Most Walkable U.S. Cities
Walk Score: Cool Green Google Map Mashup

Comments

[Topfeeder]

Jacksonville in the house. Yep, we drive everywhere. At one time Jacksonville was the largest city (in land mass, not population) on the east coast. What does make Jacksonville livable are its little neighborhoods like Avondale, Riverside, San Jose and San Marco. You can walk within your own neighborhood, but do need to catch a ride to the Jaguar game, beach or the mall.

[tbone99]

You don't want to take a bus in El Paso either - very few bus stops offer any kind of shade from the blazing sun- with rate of skin cancer very high

[wickedtribe]

I have lived in Memphis for 31 years. I have also traveled the U.S. extensively. I can tell you the reason close to half of the cities on the worst walking cities list are southeastern cities. It's often very hot and humid. Walking in Memphis between the months of May and October is dangerous to your health. But you would be amazed how many people in Memphis do walk, especially in the Midtown area.

I have read several comments posted thus far that claim Memphis citizens are too dumb to realize that we have to pay for sidewalks that will make the city more walkable. To you, I say that it is you who are ignorant. Many Southern cities don't have sidewalks not because we are too dumb to realize that we need them or because we are too poor to afford them but because part of the allure of the South is it's less-than-tame nature. I like having grass instead of concrete lining my city. In many neighborhoods deemed historical districts, sidewalks would mar the atmosphere and detract form the historical value of the neighborhood. When walking in my city, the last thing I want to see is more concrete. The outdoors is supposed to be different from the indoors, isn't it?

And yes, Memphis drivers are nuts. So be a defensive walker.

[userw014]

I've lived in Ann Arbor, MI since '82, and until have found it very walkable. (In fact, until I got married, I didn't have a car.) The Walkscore evaluation of Ann Arbor, http://www.walkscore.com/get-score.php?street=ann+arbor%22C+NE&go=Go" is impressive.

But like other respondents have indicated, the score is based on bogus data.

The first restaurant is a SUBWAY! Downtown, which (a long time ago) had a very nice mix of retail shops, is now almost entirely restaurants! Of course, the SUBWAY it found is in the student ghetto.

Actually, the center of the map used by WalkScore seems to be the center of the University of Michigan's Central Campus - "The Diag", a nice pedestrian space (just keep walking or the student-fed mooching squirrels will assault you.)

It picked up a film festival as a movie theater. (There are surviving downtown movie theaters.)

It seems to have picked up a museum library as a library - ignoring the other fine libraries.

A book store that specializes in course books and related student needs is a book store - ignoring Borders Store #1 and a multitude of used book stores.

Yeah, I like Ann Arbor - but I wouldn't use WalkScore to evaluate the walkability of a place, other than on a 1 to 3 scale (or "bad", "tolerable", "good")

[JTyroler]

Yeah, I didn't expect Kansas City to be on the most walkable list. There's quite a lot of the city that doesn't have sidewalks, plus we don't have a very high population density (and that's not counting the suburbs).

[GallopingCat]

The biggest problem with Walkscore that I see is that the algorithm is based on Google maps Local Search. Burger King is considered a restaurant, and because of the nature of businesses coming and going, sometimes Google can't keep up its database. A grocery store within a quarter mile is considered an asset, regardless of whether you want to carry a whole chicken, eight cans and a gallon of milk a quarter mile. Convenient, yes, but walkable?

Even worse, Walkscore determines its score based on the idea that you want to walk to a destination. I would think many of us would consider a nice area to walk for exercise for you, your family, or your pets to be a key factor in what makes a city walkable. Sidewalks are a key feature of walkable cities, yet also don't seem to be a factor. Those of us who walk, walk for different reasons, but Walkscore seems to be narrowly defined.

[Whycee54]

Hey what about Metro ATLANTA? The nearest grocery store is 6 miles away.

[marleysghost]

Charlotte also rates high on the smog scale, too. The State of NC is slated to only address NO2 emissions, so auto smog is not a priority - there are no vapor recovery pumps anywhere.

Everybody needs a F150 or a Hummer to go to the grocery store in, and mom needs a Suburban or Navigator to pull the boat to the lake and the kids to soccer practice. Smart people in Charlotte, and there are many, still know better than to walk the sidewalk-less roads, and stay off the bike lanes lest they get swept into traffic by some speeding, red light running, NASCAR wannabe in his own version of Cannonball Run

[Ockham]

They're all in the south. Any place where the rich control so much of the wealth is, obviously, not going to be very hospitable to the people who actually need to walk places. Chances are, there's not even funding for proper urban infrastructure because the federal government puts so little effort into cities that don't rank high on the business scale.

[losangelian1]

I live in LA and just bought a bike because I'm tired of funding the oil companies. I started off just going back and forth to work - 5 miles - but now I love it so much I take it everywhere. When streets are too busy, I hop on the sidewalk. It's actually doable. It's great exercise, and a stress reliever. I'm over the car until I can get an electric one and charge it with solar...

[homesteader]

In Nashville, the best public transportation takes African Americans to work in one of the posh suburbs. Or it did.

(Remember that the Montgomery bus boycott worked because the white women came and got their help.)

[ebethgay]

That's not true. I started taking the MTA last year because I decided to stop being part of the problem, and it's pretty much all white people on the bus even though I live in a racially diverse community. Plus the bus doesn't run to the suburbs except for MTSU.

I am a little surprised we made it so high up the list. We now have light rail and they've added a dozen greenways in the last year.

[Dots]

I chose my Nashville neighborhood because it does have sidewalks, but generally they are FEW and far between. But all new construction here has to have sidewalks.
Even tho its hot, people can walk early and late. Fewer sidewalks = more obesity.

[nathananderson]

It's just not healthy to drive everywhere. My roomate drives to work, and he works one block away - and he drives an Expidition.

I would never live in one of these cities. Denver, Colorado is a very walkable city, thank you.

[Ceasar]

They should put Atlanta on there. Worst walking city in the south.

[BushBites]

Not sure I'd put Nashville on there.

Their downtown section seems walkable though, admittedly, it's a small part of the overall city.

But, if you're going to go by unwalkable overall, why not put LA on the list?

I'd probably add Dallas to the list too.

[lanshark]

Agreed about LA. I actually made the mistake of trying to walk to get to my destination once.

I suspect El Paso is rightly on the list, though. It's a poor city, which means lots of people end up walking or riding bikes out of necessity, and it's probably a factor in the large number of pedestrians that seem to get run over there (I used to live in the El Paso local news market and have always been shocked by the number of news reports of dead pedestrians).

[ibsteve2u]

Me, too...that was the day that I found out that cross-walks signify "Target Locked" to L.A. drivers.

[GolfingDevil05]

Nobody walks in LA....

Great, now I got that song stuck in my head.

[gooseisloose]

Here's the thing about L.A. -- PARTS of it are very walkable. It's just that few bother to try it. I moved here from NYC five years ago and I can walk the kids to school, walk to get coffee, to restaurants, shops, bars, bookstores -- all on sidewalk-lined streets. In fact, I take a six-mile walk every day without taking my life in my hands. And, because I work from home, I can go several days without getting behind the wheel of my car. I had to laugh when I first moved here and got into a conversation with a local shopkeeper. She suggested I get a dog so that I could take advantage of the neighborhood's walkability. Huh? But I have to say, many days I'm the only one out there who's not holding on to a leash...

[dawlishgal]

Minneapolis is a horrendous city to try to walk. When I was 8 1/2 months pregnant and crossing with a light with my two year old son, some goon came roaring around a corner and came within a whisker of hitting us. I was faced with the choice of teaching my child to cross with the light or to cross when it was red (and no cars were coming), because at least on red he could see the dangers he was facing. I spent a month in CA (where pedestrian rights are respected) and I was afraid to cross a street in Mpls. for months afterwards. There is absolutely no respect for the rights of pedestrians, there, no enforcement of pedestrian laws.

When we lived in a small town there, crossing streets was as bad. as in Mpls., if not worse. In a town with a large proportion of old people, about 3 seconds were given to dash across the 4-lane main street before the light changed., and if you couldn't make it, you might get stuck in the middle of the street while cars roared by on both sides.

And the drivers there are the rudest I have ever seen. "Minnesota nice"....I don't think so. Not anymore.

[frankel1205]

Noticed most of these places are comprised of people who don't want a government and don't want to pay taxes. Having lived in Memphis, there are hardly any sidewalks because the people do not want to pay for them. Unbeliveably dumb people there who do not care to contribute to building a community lifestyle for the common good. It's all about rugged individualism. Truly sad.

[jukesgrrl]

Excellent observation. Cities can't be livable if community is not a priority among the citizenry -- and it's not in many places in America today. Parks, playgrounds, libraries, senior centers, main streets of stores and restaurants, places to meet your friends for coffee. That's how life is enjoyed and memories are made. "Me, my, mine" is not a motto for happy living.

[squander123]

Wow, is this true? Now you mention it, I have noticed on visits to some US cities that there are no sidewalks, but it's never occured to me that this is due to some wild neo-con reasoning about not paying for them.

When I compare these cities to the European city I live in, I find it difficult to see a way out of the problem, because it's so entrenched, and has become such a vicious circle. US cities are built to 'sprawl' because there's an assumption that everyone will drive, so then everyone HAS to drive, etc. Here in Europe we have extensive public transport systems of various kinds, but they work because of the comparative density of our cities, which make the public transport viable. I don't see how that will work in US cities with low density and massive acreage. It's going to take a very smart idea indeed to solve this problem...