The Ranking Levels
Foot Traffic Ahead 2023 ranks the top 35 metro areas by their walkable urbanism using an index that considers premiums in commercial rents, multifamily rental rates, and for-sale home prices. Co-authored by Michael Rodriguez, AICP, and Christopher B. Leinberger, and using data from Yardi Matrix and Rocktop Partners, the report finds that the demand for walkable urban real estate far exceeds supply. Read our press release here.
Level 1 : Highest Walkable Urbanism (FTA Rankings Nos. 1-8)
These places host the largest concentrations of knowledge economy industries along with large, connected transit systems, and a history of more compact urbanism that pre-dates 1940. For example, Chicago contains most of its walkable urbanism along its MARTA and CTA network. In Boston, the T anchors walkable urbanism in and outside the center city. The same goes for the San Francisco Bay Area with the BART Caltrain and MUNI rail systems.
Level 2 : Upper Middle Walkable Urbanism (FTA Rankings Nos. 9-18)
The rankings of these places are heavily based on the inclusion of Type II walkable neighborhoods. Level 2 regions are mainly pre-20th century developments that were converted to drivable suburbs, and that are currently being retrofitted for more walkable development. Many of these areas saw significantly more foot traffic during the pandemic.
Level 3 : Lower-Middle Urbanism (FTA Rankings Nos. 19-27)
This category is divided between Midwestern metros repositioning their historically industrial economies and Sunbelt metros attempting to introduce walkable urbanism. These areas tend to have limited transit networks that leave significant portions of their region disconnected from walkable urbanism.
Level 4 : Lowest Walkable Urbanism (FTA Rankings Nos. 18-35)
This level consists of many Sunbelt metros with downtowns and other urban commercial areas that are in the process of revitalization that have some elements of walkable infrastructure, but are not connected, whether it be by transit or other modes of transportation. These places were developed to be auto-oriented, and have remained that way.
What We Mean By Social Equity
In this report, we narrow our focus to aspects most pertinent to Foot Traffic Ahead’s emphasis on walkability: housing costs, transit access, and walkability distance. Our Social Equity Index answers two essential questions:
- How hard is it for someone to access walkable areas and the benefits located there?
- How do price premiums and lack of housing supply impact who can afford to live in and near these highly desirable areas?
Balancing Accessibility: Social Equity Index for Walkable Urbanism in Top 35 Metros
While high walkable urbanism may exist, accessibility is unevenly distributed. Affordability alone doesn't guarantee accessibility, as some affordable areas lack transit connectivity and walkability. Conversely, more expensive areas may offer better transit and walkability. Our Social Equity Index evaluates the top 35 metros based on housing affordability, transit quality, and proximity to walkable spaces for various socioeconomic groups, ensuring a balanced assessment of accessibility to affordable and walkable areas.
Equity Wins: Affordable, Walkable Areas in Cities like Cleveland and Detroit
Affordable areas with less walkable urbanism, as indicated by lower rankings on our Foot Traffic Ahead Index, show higher social equity in our Index. Examples include Cleveland, Kansas City, Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore. These cities score well on the Proximity Index, indicating that the existing limited walkability is less segregated among socioeconomic and racial groups.
Transit, Walkability, and Equity: City Contrasts
Other regions which are more connected by transit and contain higher amounts of walkable urban development but are more expensive, like New York City or Philadelphia, also rank highly on our Social Equity Index with their high scores on the Transit Index giving them a boost. Those regions that are both unaffordable and not well connected or walkable, like Los Angeles and Miami, rank towards the bottom of our Social Equity Index.
Future Momentum Index
The Future Momentum Index identifies which regions’ markets are improving their walkability, and may be ready to further expand their walkability. This ranking is determined by measuring the market share of walkable urban development, price premiums (indicative of demand), and the distribution of walkability in each region.
Supported by standard distance, the Index gauges walkable neighborhood distribution in each region. Larger standard distances signify more dispersed walkability, correlating with higher ranks on our Future Momentum Index, indicating potential for continued urban walkability growth.
Based on an average of these factors, each of the metros was grouped into four different growth categories:
Urban Boom: Boston, DC, SF, Charlotte, and Miami Lead Walkability Surge
Bold growth areas included the Boston, Washington, DC, San Francisco, Charlotte, and Miami regions. These regions ranked highly on both our overall Foot Traffic Ahead and Standard Distance Indices, meaning they are rapidly growing their amount of walkable urban places in addition to benefitting from a pre-established network of walkability.
Emerging Walkable Futures: Atlanta, Baltimore, Nashville, Sacramento, Dallas–Fort Worth
Atlanta, Baltimore, Nashville, Sacramento, and Dallas–Fort Worth lead as future vision regions. Scoring below average on our Foot Traffic Ahead Index but surpassing on the Future Momentum Index, these areas show a promising shift towards walkable urbanism. The Sunbelt region is witnessing a rising trend as cities redefine their downtowns and suburban areas with walkable elements.
Stable Walkable Hubs: New York, Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles
Mature walkable regions include New York, Seattle, Portland, and Los Angeles. These regions are well-established in their development of walkable urbanism, ranking highly on our Foot Traffic Ahead Index, and lower on our Future Momentum Index. In this category, walkable urbanism is stable. This doesn’t mean that these cities couldn’t develop more walkable urbanism, just that their current inventory is higher than average.
Low-Walkability Metros: Denver, Cleveland, Houston, Columbus, Kansas City
Below-average metros include Denver, Cleveland, Houston, Columbus, and Kansas City. These areas rank at the bottom of both our Foot Traffic Ahead and Future Momentum Indices, and have historically implemented less walkability. These regions tend to develop in auto-centric ways, and are located near the center of the country in metro areas with ties to industry.
Photo by Liz Ligon / Union Square Partnership
Livable places. Healthy people. Shared prosperity.
© 2025 Smart Growth America. All rights reserved
Site By3Lane Marketing
Social Equity Index