PDA

View Full Version : Brooklyn's Walkability



fall guy
November 21st, 2003, 06:37 PM
Is Brooklyn as pedestrain friendly as Manhattan?

Gulcrapek
November 21st, 2003, 08:25 PM
It depends on where within... but for the most part, yes, although there are areas that are kind of large tracts of single use (e.g. a big area of residential only, maybe 5-8 blocks to a store, but these are rare anyhow).

ablarc
November 23rd, 2003, 02:30 PM
No.

NoyokA
November 23rd, 2003, 02:39 PM
And it's hard to find a decent bathroom. In short, Brooklyn is not very pedestrian friendly.

alejo
November 25th, 2003, 08:27 PM
if you compare to most of the cities in america I would say yes.

Clarknt67
November 28th, 2003, 12:53 PM
I guess it depends on what you mean by "pedestrian friendly." I'd say it's more so. Someone brought up the issue of public bathrooms, true there are few (but then how many are there in Manhattan? Friendly isn't a word that comes to mind). Also proprietors may not be so hostile as they can be in Manhattan enforcing the "bathrooms are for customers only" rule.

I live in the Heights and find that the car traffic is sparser, moves slower and not as aggressively in most of areas I walk (Heights, Cobble Hill, Boreum Hill, Downtown, Fort Greene Carrol Gardens). There are far fewer speeding taxis and busses that don't concede the right of way. I'd say it's MORE pedestrian-friendly, at least in the areas I cited.

And since I work days in Manhattan, I'm there everyday to compare. I don't have to pay nearly as much attention in Brooklyn to safeguard my well-being.

Also, one can actually WALK the sidewalks of Brooklyn, without all those insane bike messengers and food delivery people running you over with their bikes. Plus, you almost never run into the crushing hordes of people that make expedient travel impossible like you do in Rock Center and Times Square.

Now that I think about it, who would call Manhattan pedestrian-friendly?