America's most walkable cities

"BrianK" schrieb

This may be true if you are very fit. But it's not such a good walking
city if you are over 65 and either have asthma, congestive heart
failure, or some other pulmonary condition.

....and a bag full of groceries!

Jochen

In article ,
(Matthew T. Russotto) wrote:

In article ,
Stan Horwitz wrote:

Karen; you missed the point of the article. No one is disputing that
Philadelphia has a great park system. The article I cited was in
reference to how easy it is to run errands in each of the cities on foot
such as buying groceries, visiting friends, going to the doctor, etc.
It was about how convenient each city is for running errands on foot.

Right; large parks make that worse by getting in the way.

There's a large park with a river running through it that adds nearly
two miles onto the walk between my home and the nearest train station. I
love the park, but I would love it even more if there was a pedestrian
bridge over the river in my area.

In article ,
says...

On 12/7/2007 10:12 PM Hunt plucked Senior Frog's Magic Twanger and said:
In article ,
says...

Check out this CNN article


[SNIP]

I rank San Francisco as a very walkable city - good views, great elevation
changes, and friendly cross-walks.

Hunt

This may be true if you are very fit. But it's not such a good walking
city if you are over 65 and either have asthma, congestive heart
failure, or some other pulmonary condition.

At 60, with 35 lbs. of cameras, I've never had a problem. Now, if one is
infirm, as you mention, then almost any walking might pose a problem. In a
"normal" day in SF, I'll go from the Financial district to the GG Bridge,
often stopping to climb the Coit Tower, if the weather looks like it might
give me something, that I have not yet photographed - then back to the hotel.
We always walk to dinner, unless there are night time neighborhoods to be
traversed, that we'd rather not explore.

Hunt

On Dec 11, 9:54 pm, (Hunt) wrote:
In article ,
says...







On 12/7/2007 10:12 PM Hunt plucked Senior Frog's Magic Twanger and said:
In article ,
says...

Check out this CNN article

[SNIP]

I rank San Francisco as a very walkable city - good views, great elevation
changes, and friendly cross-walks.

Hunt

This may be true if you are very fit. But it's not such a good walking
city if you are over 65 and either have asthma, congestive heart
failure, or some other pulmonary condition.

At 60, with 35 lbs. of cameras, I've never had a problem. Now, if one is
infirm, as you mention, then almost any walking might pose a problem. In a
"normal" day in SF, I'll go from the Financial district to the GG Bridge,
often stopping to climb the Coit Tower, if the weather looks like it might
give me something, that I have not yet photographed - then back to the hotel.
We always walk to dinner, unless there are night time neighborhoods to be
traversed, that we'd rather not explore.

When my walking wife and I visited San Fran, we commented on
how much better shape we'd be in if we lived there. The ascents were
steep but the kind where over time you'd aclimate to the well over
time.
Truth is our hour walk in the morning would take less space. 20
minutes down hill, 40 minutes back up ;-)

Walking in SF should be my only problem. try coming to this polluted hell. .
Sf has many many more great air days then here. Having said that if you walk
near city traffic your putting yourself at risk and many women do that
without knowing they are putting themselves at risk. Of course women do that
because they want to be seen and not risk being jumped in remote place. We
have the least percentage of good air days in my east coast city ,,
something the media and the charts they come out with refuse to list! I
never believed in conspiracies.. I do now!Well I cleared up the mistics why
we are number one for respiratory disease but not necessarily because we get
the most accumulation of pollutants. We just get the most days in moderate
and not good air. The bad days are there too.
"Hunt" wrote in message
...
In article ,

says...

On 12/7/2007 10:12 PM Hunt plucked Senior Frog's Magic Twanger and said:
In article ,
says...

Check out this CNN article


[SNIP]

I rank San Francisco as a very walkable city - good views, great
elevation
changes, and friendly cross-walks.

Hunt

This may be true if you are very fit. But it's not such a good walking
city if you are over 65 and either have asthma, congestive heart
failure, or some other pulmonary condition.

At 60, with 35 lbs. of cameras, I've never had a problem. Now, if one is
infirm, as you mention, then almost any walking might pose a problem. In a
"normal" day in SF, I'll go from the Financial district to the GG Bridge,
often stopping to climb the Coit Tower, if the weather looks like it might
give me something, that I have not yet photographed - then back to the
hotel.
We always walk to dinner, unless there are night time neighborhoods to be
traversed, that we'd rather not explore.

Hunt

In article ,
BrianK wrote:

This may be true if you are very fit. But it's not such a good walking
city if you are over 65 and either have asthma, congestive heart
failure, or some other pulmonary condition.

I doubt that any area is good for walking for anyone who has congestive
heart failure, or some other pulmonary condition and possibly asthma too.

Since this group covers Canada as well as the US, I'd nominate St.
John's, Newfoundland for top spot on the list. Almost everything you'd
want is in the downtown area and it's about one mile long and about five
blocks wide. However, if you want to get away from the urban
environment, you can walk out to Signal Hill (one mile) or back into the
woods. The city has a 70 mile network of walking trails called The
Grand Concourse and these are generally EXCELLENT trails (stairs for the
hills, boardwalks over soft soil, etc.)


Stan Horwitz wrote:
Check out this CNN article

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/04/walkable.communities.ap/index.html

It ranks Philly (my home town) highly in terms of walkability. I love
walking in Philly. In fact, I expect to be taking a nice walk there in a
half an hour or so.

Washington was top ranked. I haven't been to many of the cities on this
list, but I would agree with it for the cities where I have been to such
as New York, Boston, and Las Vegas, although walking in Las Vegas is a
problem for many people in the hot summer weather.

I am glad that walking is becoming more popular. Its great exercise,
great for the environment, and it helps clear one's mind.

"Stan Horwitz" wrote in message
...
In article ,
BrianK wrote:

This may be true if you are very fit. But it's not such a good walking
city if you are over 65 and either have asthma, congestive heart
failure, or some other pulmonary condition.

I doubt that any area is good for walking for anyone who has congestive
heart failure, or some other pulmonary condition and possibly asthma too.

stan
having asthma does not preclude someone from walking or keeping fit or even
jogging. I don't know about congestive heart failure yet, thank god