Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
Mexico City is the only one of those cities I haven't visited before. The others I've been to multiple times. Nothing in the Americas matches New York in terms of density and rail connectivity. In terms of built environment, I think coastal neighborhoods in Rio push that city into second best. Buenos Aires is in third.
|
Those neighbourhoods in Rio are perfect examples: pleasant streets, high densities, lots of restaurants, bars, shops and now they even got the subway connecting them to Downtown.
Rio is a miss opportunity. Plagued by political incompetence, crime and decay. It would be a perfect city otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
São Paulo is densely populated but I think it's less walkable than cities like Philadelphia, Boston, SF, or Chicago. The descriptions I've heard of Mexico City actually remind me of São Paulo.
|
The thing about São Paulo is not the city, but several pockets scattered over its neighbourhoods where you can live easily without a car. And as the city is big, we're talking about millions of people.
And even though the city has a somewhat autocentric mentality, its subways+trains carry 8 million people daily and buses carry an extra 8 million. There's nothing anywhere close in Latin America. It could be better, but it keeps the city moving.
Last week was my 8th anniversary in the city, and I never bothered to buy a car. There is no downside for me. Everything worth is close by walking, bus or subway. And more important, waiting times are measure in seconds on rush hour.
That's why I'd argue, if we consider the whole urban/metro area, São Paulo is far ahead those US cities where outside their central cores, living without a car is challenging.