Such weird metrics to go by. They’re counting the distance between the top attractions which just so happens to include Cadbury World which is way out in the suburb of Bourneville. And they’re also including natural phenomenon such as elevation differences.
It’s not as if it’s a good reflection on the pedestrian-friendliness of the city.
Birmingham Crowned The Least Walkable City In The UK
Submitted 1 day ago by Veserr@sh.itjust.works to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
Comments
galmuth@feddit.uk 1 day ago
brewery@feddit.uk 12 hours ago
So true. It’s just purely a weird way of calculating this. Birmingham has come on leaps and bounds with walk ability in the city centre and suburbs. On the few occasions I’m there, I love taking a walk around the city centre noticing the changes and less cars you have to deal with. Nobody would be able to change that you need a bus to get to a suburb housing this attraction.
paks@feddit.uk 1 day ago
A very tourist centric metric when day-to-day living and commuting is much more relevant
MrNesser@lemmy.world 1 day ago
City centre is quite walkable
Pumafred9@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I literally said that to my coworker on Saturday! Used to be a nightmare before they closed the roads off in the city for Trams.
Gentryfried@feddit.uk 3 hours ago
I think this is completely true.