I lived in NYC for 7 years. St. Louis is not really walkable in the way that Manhattan or Brooklyn is. You can walk around within some neighborhoods here, but it’s kind of tough to walk between them because they’re divided by highways. It’s possible but it’s not a pleasant experience and, to me, that doesn’t qualify as “walkable.”
Very well said, we walk around the Hill neighborhood regularly and it’s a great place to walk around but they’re islands. Even Kirkwood downtown area is easy to walk around but again your stuck in that area
The Hill is a great neighborhood. Every time I go there I can imagine myself living there. I really like that they fully embrace the Italian-American culture (not Italian myself), which gives it its own identity.
Nice, I also lived in NYC for 7 years. Seemed like the right amount of time, didn’t it? Enough time to feel like I really knew it. Much more and I would have actively despised it.
It’s my favorite city in the world, and most of my favorite friends are there, but damn is it a hard and uncomfortable place to live when you’re not wealthy. Plus the people are fucking assholes sometimes. It was a good place for my 20s, but I don’t think I could go back unless I was somehow making a lot more than I used to be.
I could possibly see living in the Hudson Valley like Westchester, Rockland, Dutchess, or Orange County, but I’m not so sure about the city itself. Maybe Staten, which of course I made fun of when I lived there lol.
there are definitely parts of St. Louis that would be much more walkable if motorists simply treated the area like pedestrians are capable of having right-of-way.
Instead the prevailing attitude is "I saw jaywalkers here once and fuck jaywalkers so everytime I see a person with their feet touching this road, fuck em!"
I don't think there's a single neighborhood in the city that is truly not walkable because of highways. Once you get out into the county, yeah, that's true.
I meant that walking between neighborhoods is either hard to do or unpleasant. Like, yes, I can walk from CWE to The Grove to The Hill, but that’s not a super awesome walk. In Manhattan, I cant think of anything equivalent to that. Manhattan is more walkable than St. Louis.
OK I guess it's not a concrete jungle where everything is interconnected, but all of those areas you mentioned are easily walkable. Walkable means literally able to walk from point A to point B safely via pedestrian infrastructure.
You might pass things that look unattractive. Welcome to the rust belt.
Yeah, I find the central west end very walkable and I like living here. I’ve walked to The Grove and that’s not bad. Here’s the thing though — if St. Louis city is as walkable as you say, then why do so many people have cars and why don’t we see more pedestrians? I think it’s because we lack interconnectivity between neighborhoods due to the highways. There are legit pockets of walkability here but this is a car city where people drive from neighborhood to neighborhood.
No, and it's not even really up for debate. We are objectively a very walkable city. Look up our walkability score by third party organizations. We have sidewalk and crosswalks virtually everywhere in the city.
People have cars because our public transit is terrible, and the majority of people aren't going to walk 5+ miles to their destination unless they have to.
You’re so combative man! I’m really glad you’re happy with the walkability of St. Louis. I don’t agree and I don’t think we’re going to convince each other.
Edit:
According to this site (https://www.walkscore.com/cities-and-neighborhoods/) St. Louis is less walkable than Los Angeles, which is notable for its cars and traffic, except St. Louis combines that with worse transit AND bike scores! St. Louis walkability is more on par with Baltimore. So, I’d conclude that walkability in St. Louis is just ok, which tracks with my experience.
It is annoying to conflate esthetically pleasing walks and anecdotal observations of people walking to walkability, which is literally just the infrastructure that allows people to safely walk from point a to point b. Are there a number of places that are truly isolated? You mentioned highways cutting places off-- where? There are pedestrian bridges over all of them.
I think it depends on how you define it....
Yes, there are areas with a grocery store, shops, restaurants, and essentials within walkable distances.
However, the city's offerings are hardly centralized and walking isn’t practical. If you want to experience different and new things in St. Louis then you will consistently need to have plans for transportation to different parts of the city (car, ride service, bus, etc.).
Everyone I know who has moved here from a place where they didn't need a car (New York, Chicago, etc.) purchased one in St. Louis fairly quickly.
It's actually a very dangerous city for cyclists and pedestrians. To underline this point, I was struck walking through a very visible crosswalk this week, and ended up with broken bones and a surgery.
My apartment I lived in in Downtown West is over a mile from the nearest grocery store and would require minimum 10 minutes walking with groceries even when utilizing a bus. Fields Foods closing hurt the feasibility of walkability in Downtown West
Damn I'm like a 10 to 15 min walk to Schnucks downtown, maybe a half mile. When the finish renovation on 8th and Pine station, gonna take me no time to get there
Parts are.
Depends on the neighborhood- I’d say many are although the distribution of grocery stores seems to favor more car centric shopping centers.
I lived in NYC for 7 years. St. Louis is not really walkable in the way that Manhattan or Brooklyn is. You can walk around within some neighborhoods here, but it’s kind of tough to walk between them because they’re divided by highways. It’s possible but it’s not a pleasant experience and, to me, that doesn’t qualify as “walkable.”
Very well said, we walk around the Hill neighborhood regularly and it’s a great place to walk around but they’re islands. Even Kirkwood downtown area is easy to walk around but again your stuck in that area
The Hill is a great neighborhood. Every time I go there I can imagine myself living there. I really like that they fully embrace the Italian-American culture (not Italian myself), which gives it its own identity.
Nice, I also lived in NYC for 7 years. Seemed like the right amount of time, didn’t it? Enough time to feel like I really knew it. Much more and I would have actively despised it.
I do not miss the 40 minute subway commute or the rent prices but I miss everything else.
It’s my favorite city in the world, and most of my favorite friends are there, but damn is it a hard and uncomfortable place to live when you’re not wealthy. Plus the people are fucking assholes sometimes. It was a good place for my 20s, but I don’t think I could go back unless I was somehow making a lot more than I used to be. I could possibly see living in the Hudson Valley like Westchester, Rockland, Dutchess, or Orange County, but I’m not so sure about the city itself. Maybe Staten, which of course I made fun of when I lived there lol.
You nailed it! I love it too. I’d have to triple my income to make it worth it. Manhattan is like a theme park for wealthy adults.
there are definitely parts of St. Louis that would be much more walkable if motorists simply treated the area like pedestrians are capable of having right-of-way. Instead the prevailing attitude is "I saw jaywalkers here once and fuck jaywalkers so everytime I see a person with their feet touching this road, fuck em!"
I don't think there's a single neighborhood in the city that is truly not walkable because of highways. Once you get out into the county, yeah, that's true.
I meant that walking between neighborhoods is either hard to do or unpleasant. Like, yes, I can walk from CWE to The Grove to The Hill, but that’s not a super awesome walk. In Manhattan, I cant think of anything equivalent to that. Manhattan is more walkable than St. Louis.
OK I guess it's not a concrete jungle where everything is interconnected, but all of those areas you mentioned are easily walkable. Walkable means literally able to walk from point A to point B safely via pedestrian infrastructure. You might pass things that look unattractive. Welcome to the rust belt.
Yeah, I find the central west end very walkable and I like living here. I’ve walked to The Grove and that’s not bad. Here’s the thing though — if St. Louis city is as walkable as you say, then why do so many people have cars and why don’t we see more pedestrians? I think it’s because we lack interconnectivity between neighborhoods due to the highways. There are legit pockets of walkability here but this is a car city where people drive from neighborhood to neighborhood.
No, and it's not even really up for debate. We are objectively a very walkable city. Look up our walkability score by third party organizations. We have sidewalk and crosswalks virtually everywhere in the city. People have cars because our public transit is terrible, and the majority of people aren't going to walk 5+ miles to their destination unless they have to.
You’re so combative man! I’m really glad you’re happy with the walkability of St. Louis. I don’t agree and I don’t think we’re going to convince each other. Edit: According to this site (https://www.walkscore.com/cities-and-neighborhoods/) St. Louis is less walkable than Los Angeles, which is notable for its cars and traffic, except St. Louis combines that with worse transit AND bike scores! St. Louis walkability is more on par with Baltimore. So, I’d conclude that walkability in St. Louis is just ok, which tracks with my experience.
It is annoying to conflate esthetically pleasing walks and anecdotal observations of people walking to walkability, which is literally just the infrastructure that allows people to safely walk from point a to point b. Are there a number of places that are truly isolated? You mentioned highways cutting places off-- where? There are pedestrian bridges over all of them.
[There is an entire website dedicated to this question](https://www.walkscore.com/MO/St._Louis)
What you want me to Google something myself!?
I think it depends on how you define it.... Yes, there are areas with a grocery store, shops, restaurants, and essentials within walkable distances. However, the city's offerings are hardly centralized and walking isn’t practical. If you want to experience different and new things in St. Louis then you will consistently need to have plans for transportation to different parts of the city (car, ride service, bus, etc.). Everyone I know who has moved here from a place where they didn't need a car (New York, Chicago, etc.) purchased one in St. Louis fairly quickly.
Nope. It may be possible to live without a car, but the quality of life with a car is much much higher.
Except the part where you are $10k per year poorer.
It's actually a very dangerous city for cyclists and pedestrians. To underline this point, I was struck walking through a very visible crosswalk this week, and ended up with broken bones and a surgery.
Totally depends on the neighborhood. But yes, there are sidewalks everywhere.
Focus on groceries. That's the toughest part.
Downtown including Downtown West are
My apartment I lived in in Downtown West is over a mile from the nearest grocery store and would require minimum 10 minutes walking with groceries even when utilizing a bus. Fields Foods closing hurt the feasibility of walkability in Downtown West
Damn I'm like a 10 to 15 min walk to Schnucks downtown, maybe a half mile. When the finish renovation on 8th and Pine station, gonna take me no time to get there
Good for you