Big Surprise: America's Fittest Cities are Also Most Walkable Cities

Some people definitely underestimate walking as a great form of exercise. It's good to be reminded of this through these reports.

That's one of the main points to new urbanism. I have a friend who was asked by a publisher to write a book about new urbanism. He was so excited about the "job." But, the more he got into it the more fascinated he was about new urbanism and even though he had no statistical evidence, he said that walkable cities encourage exercise and most likely maintain a healthier community.

Happy to find this article which promotes the simple, but wonderful, act of walking. Curious as to why Indianapolis ended up on both lists: most walkable and least walkable. Did I not read correctly? Anyway, for those interested a favorite book is Rebecca Solnit's "Wanderlust, a History of Walking"

Cheers,

Dave in Davis

Happy to find this article which promotes the simple, but wonderful, act of walking. Curious as to why Indianapolis ended up on both lists: most walkable and least walkable. Did I not read correctly? Anyway, for those interested a favorite book is Rebecca Solnit's "Wanderlust, a History of Walking"

Cheers,

Dave in Davis

Let's not get to carried away in thinking the walkable and fit are the same.. naturally overlap will happen. But anyone who has been in Atlanta knows that city is un-walkable and has horrid public transit. And ATL is rated higher than NYC which has wonderful public transit and is much easier to walk

Huh, that's strange. I live in the Chicago area, and it's regularly voted one of the fattest cities in the country. Not sure how scientific it is, but it's on the nightly "news" shows a couple times a year. The mayor and city council have even proposed ideas on how to fight obesity in the city.

Boston is indeed a great walking city. Stinks to drive there, because the roads are laid out on old cow paths, many streets are narrow, and the other drivers are all of the opinion "I own the road". There's also a decent subway and bus system to get to areas beyond downtown.

Makes me wish I was able to walk more than a block. maybe after I get my gimpy ankles replaced.... For now, I'll stick to bicycles and motorized transport to avoid pain. I wouldn't bike in Boston due to the lack of bike lanes and the aggressive drivers, but there are some areas on the outskirts that are suitable for it. There are a few "rail trail" paved bike paths that are great for commuters. One, the Minuteman Bikeway, starts out in the suburbs and ends up at a subway station. You can also bike along the Charles River, which is a lovely area.

i second the huh? i am originally from Indy, at it to is often up near the top of the fattest cities lists.

i think this and the fat city lists are proof that if you ask the right questions and look at the data is a specific fashion, it can tell you anything.

DFW and Houston in the top 15? Yeah, right! Texas is horrible for walking/biking/public transportation and a huge amount of people are overweight. In downtown Dallas (and Houston I'm sure), everyone just drives their car and parks it as close as possible to their destination and walks a couple of blocks. There are a LOT of overweight people in Texas because they drive everywhere and are surrounded by a McD's on every corner. And the economy going downhill hasn't changed anything. I don't see people walking/biking more or even eating less fast food. People aren't even slowing down on the highway to conserve gas in their ridiculous SUVs.

phoenix? walkable? ha

About DFW: How does Dallas meet the title of the article

this was directly copied from the report. Apparently they are only healthy because they are young! Their walkability is weak as is their public transportation and they have some low metric of farmers markets per capita.

This sound more likely this is the top 16 cities of the 20 that we chose to interview... Dallas is not a walkable city.

Strengths:
•Younger median age
•Larger percent exercised in past 30 days
•Lower smoking rate
•Lower obesity rate
•More have excellent or very good health status
•Lower rate of asthma
•Lower rate of diabetes
•More acres of parkland per capita
Challenges:
•Lower percent graduated from high school
•Lower median income
•Higher percent below poverty
•Fewer have moderate or vigorous physical activity
•Fewer eating 5+ servings of fruit and vegetables
•Higher mortality from cardiovascular disease
•Higher mortality from diabetes
•Lower percent of residents with health insurance
•Smaller percent of MSA land area as parkland
•Fewer farmers’ markets per capita
•Fewer using public transportation to go to work
•Fewer walking or biking to work
•Fewer ball diamonds per capita
•Fewer swimming pools per capita
•Lower park-related expenditures per capita
•Fewer primary care providers per capita

hmmm Houston and Dallas? yeah right. I live in Houston and most people here are not very healthy and our public transportation is shameful. You have to drive to EVERYTHING! very few bike trails unless you live in the hoity toity area of riveroaks/montrose/heights I am surprised that Austin didn't make it though because I would believe it is more walkable then Houston and people there bike a lot. Although its mainly the downtown UT area.

Philadelphia has been rated (within the last 5 years) as the fattest city in America. Not sure what numbers went into this survey...