This story was written by Kathy Morris and originally appeared on Zippia.com.
No one wants to be quarantined, and everyone has spent the past couple of months during the coronavirus pandemic just trying to make the best of it.
However, some cities just aren’t great places to be stuck at home. We often think about what cities have to offer in terms of nightlife, dining out and exciting things to do. However, for the millions of Americans who have been stuck at home in formerly exciting cities, the nearby theme park or vibrant theater scene didn’t do much.
What did they want? Spacious apartments, speedy internet, plentiful takeout options and nearby green space.
We hit the numbers to find the cities that had the best, and least, to offer these social distancers.
We set out to find the cities where those sheltering in place have it the relative worst. We ranked each city, 1 to 99, based on four areas:
- Average apartment size
- Acres of parkland per person
- Percent of residents with broadband internet
- Number of takeout options
The average apartment size comes from RENTCafe — the smaller the average apartment size, the lower the score. The amount of parkland came from the Trust for Public Land. We looked at the number of restaurants listed for each city on Doordash. Finally, we used the trusty U.S. Census to see the percentage of residents in each city with broadband internet — including cable, fiber or DSL.
Keep reading to see why these cities aren’t the place to be stuck at home.