Once we finally arrived, we were treated to overpriced, mediocre attractions. Well, I am being a little hard on the aquarium. Although overpriced at $25, it was still good. World of Coke is an absolute ripoff at $16.
The experience, as a whole, had me wishing for the insanity of Naples at times or Rome. In Rome, we walked from one corner to the other, and never had even a fraction of the issues we have in Atlanta, going a way shorter distance.
Now, I know that I am not reinventing the wheel by suggesting that cities which were built before cars were the major mode of transportation are more pedestrian friendly than those which were built after, but never has it been so clear before. What I am suggesting, is that these pedestrian friendly cities make for better touring all around than the newer, motorist cities. There is something enjoyable about walking up to a great attraction, viewing it, and walking on to a local snack (gelato!) or passing some great architecture, street performer or fountain. Although some cities in the United States can replicate this experience (New York, Boston, Chicago), it is amazing to me that every city in Europe that I have visited fits this bill perfectly.
What do you think? Does driving and parking somehow impede the enjoyment of a city? Do you prefer to immerse yourself in a city or to just get in and out?