Save our cities
Most/least harmful cities
This page is dedicated to the cities that lead this country in eco-friendly innovation as well as the most harmful, most pollutant cities.
I will be using the site (http://www.walkscore.com/cities-and-neighborhoods/) to test which cities are the most and least harmful. I will also include a reason for these walk scores. The site also offers transit and bike scores, which I will also post.
I will be using the site (http://www.walkscore.com/cities-and-neighborhoods/) to test which cities are the most and least harmful. I will also include a reason for these walk scores. The site also offers transit and bike scores, which I will also post.
Best cities...
New York, NY...
Walk score- 88
On the island of Manhattan, you are within walking distance of all errands one might need to accomplish, and you can easily access the cities extensive subway system. The site states that a New Yorker can live their whole life and never own a car. |
Transit score- 81
New York has 578 buses, 13 railways and 24 subway lines. New York can be easily accessed through public transportation. The public transportation is convenient for most errands, however for the average New Yorker, it takes 48 minutes to get to work via public transportation. |
Bike score- 62
Although a bike sharing system (citi bike) is available in New York, only the southern parts of Manhattan and the northern part of Brooklyn have extensive and consistent bike lanes. Only some errands can be carried out via bike. It is hard to navigate through the different boroughs of New York on a bike. |
San Francisco, CA...
Walk Score- 84
San Francisco is incredibly easy to navigate on foot, all of the downtown area can be accesses by walking easily. Most errands can be accomplished on foot. |
Transit Score- 80
San Francisco has both an effective and well thought out transit infrastructure. in thirty minutes, one can easily access all of downtown and some parts of Oakland. |
Bike Score- 70
San Francisco has very scattered and poorly planned bike lane infrastructure. It is hard to get to many places in San Francisco safely, effectively, and efficiently while on a bike. |
Boston, MA...
Walk Score- 80
Boston has wonderful walking pathways that are very navigable. The average tourist can easily get to whatever destination that they have in mind on foot. |
Transit Score- 72
Boston had the very first subway system and the city continues to impress the world when it comes to transportation. With 110 buses, 12 rail lines, 3 subway tunnels, 2 light rail lines, and 3 ferry lines, the city effectively serves its inhabitants. |
Bike Score- 68
Boston does have relatively lengthy bike paths, although they are incredibly scattered and not well thought out. The city is very hard to navigate by car, there are no exceptions to navigation by bike. |
Worst cities...
Arlington, VA...
Walk Score- 67
Many highways run through Arlington due to its proximity to Washington D.C. The only safe places to walk are in the limited city parks, trying to cross from one side of town to another without crossing the highway is impossible. |
Transit Score- 56
Many of this cities public transportation runs right through it to the capital. Only a few routes actually serve the city, 98 buses and 3 subway lines serve the surrounding area. |
Bike Score- 70
The bike lane infrastructure in Arlington is very well planned out, one can get across the interstate on a bike via a bridge. Biking may be the only effective method of transportation in Arlington. |
Rochester, NY...
Walk Score- 61
In Rochester, it is relatively easy to access the immediate downtown area by foot, but beyond walking past there, ease of walking decreases greatly. |
Transit Score- 46
Although transit is fairly fast in Rochester, the routes are very limited and only offer access to suburbs north of rochester. |
Bike Score- 57
Biking in Rochester is very nice downtown, but once you leave the downtown area, biking lanes become more and more infrequent. |