Re: Walkability

On Sun, 15 Dec 2024 21:11:30 -0700, Don Y
<blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

On 12/15/2024 7:47 PM, John Robertson wrote:

Montreal and Toronto have colder winters and their score isn't much lower than
New York.
 
Walkability is the DESIRE to walk around a city.

>
I think it is the "expected value" of the effort required to walk.
>
Boston, San Francisco, etc. are tiny places with lots of people
(we have 5 times the land area and a comparable population; so
things are more spread out).  We're the size of Chicago but with
a fifth the population.  NYC being about 25% larger and with
15+ times our population.
>
Montreal is about half the size of NYC with 1/4 the population.
Toronto is more like Chicago in size and population.
>
The point being, you can "get somewhere" in more densely populated
areas.  Or, while IN an area, can find multiple things worth your
time -- without having to resort to motorized transit.  Having to get
IN a car (which means you had to find a place to PARK it) really
raises the effort to do things
>

Lots of cities are no fun...

>
"Fun" can come in different flavors...

There have been studies that suggest that walking in the woods is
better for one's attitude than walking on pavement in a city.

This is on-topic in that we'd been discussing the idea of having
engineering meetings outdoors, while group hiking, as an alternative
to conference rooms.

So a park or something near the office is appealing.

It's raining just now, so we'll have to meet indoors today. The
discussion is about dummy loads and using CPU coolers on PC boards.