Walkability Report Raises Questions and Doubts

12 December 2007 - 9:00am

California Planning and Development Report's Paul Shigley reviews the recent report on walkability released by the Brookings Institution and finds some of its claims dubious.

"If you’re truly interested in the subject, you might want to read the entire report for yourself."

"If you read the news stories, you know that the Washington, D.C., area ranked first in walkability, followed by Boston and San Francisco. At first glance, that seemed like a reasonable top three. What caused me to pause in the first place was the ranking of Sacramento: 27th out of 30. Now, I’ve knocked Sacramento’s alleged urbanism in the past. But it’s hard for me to believe that Sacramento is less walkable than the likes of Houston, Orlando and Phoenix."

"Sacramento’s downtown and midtown are very walkable. Uses are mixed, many sidewalks are wide, motorists are accustomed to pedestrians, and the streetscape is generally pleasing. Older residential neighborhoods such as East Sacramento, Curtis Park and Land Park are full of people on foot. On the metropolitan periphery, much of the college town of Davis is easily walkable, as is the older core of Woodland."

"Ever tried to walk somewhere in Phoenix, a place defined by high-speed surface streets and low-density development? Good luck."

Source: California Planning & Development Report, December 7, 2007
Bookmark and Share
All of that only scratches the surface of what's wrong with this study. The idea that complex urban development patterns and human behavior can be meaningfully studied according to one primary criteria — density — is wrong from the start.